A wildlife strike is a collision between an animal and an aircraft which is in flight or on a take off or landing roll. The term to describe such events was initially bird strike since this was the most common scenario. However, the increased number of flights and airfields used resulted, among other things, in the increase of collisions between aircraft and animals other than birds. Wildlife strikes may occur during any phase of flight but are most likely during the take-off, initial climb, approach and landing phases. The reason is that most birds fly at lower levels and other animals can only hit an aircraft while on the ground. Wildlife strikes can be a significant threat to safety of aircraft. The impact of wildlife strike has been experienced to cause: - Cracked windshield and consequently, depressurization or pilot injury. - Engine failure due to ingestion, resulting in aborted take-off or emergency landing. - Structural damage to the fuselage, control surfaces or landing gear which could potentially lead to depressurization, Loss of Controls or emergency landing. - Other effects, for example blockage of Pitot Static System air intakes which can cause unreliable indications. The damage caused depends on a number of factors: Aircraft size - smaller aircraft can withstand less damage before the safety of fligh is compromised and are generally more vulnerable. Animal size and weight - The weight of an animal is directly proportional to the energy to be absorbed in an impact. Speed during impact - the kinetic energy to be absorbed is proportional to the square of the relative speed of the two objects. Normally the aicraft is much faster and therefore the animal speed can be disregarded. READ FULL ARTICLE

When flight crew are confronted with an emergency or abnormal situation during flight, they normally prioritize their immediate actions in the following order: Aviate - Navigate - Communicate. Aviate The pilot’s immediate priority is to ensure the safe flight path and condition of the aircraft. This not only includes the flying of the aircraft but also the completion of checklist drills. The safe flight path may even include the initiation of a controlled rapid descent. For a modern two-crew flight deck, the flight crew distribute the responsibilities between the available crew members. Under normal conditions, one flight crew member (pilot flying) takes responsibility for the flight path of the aircraft while the other flight crew member (pilot not flying or pilot monitoring) deals with all radio communications and actions/reads out checklists. In order to maintain the correct balance of workload in an emergency when additional QRH checklists and AFM procedures may be required, the pilot flying will often assume responsibility for radio communications. When there is a significant problem, the workload during the first moment is often high and the flight crew may elect to inform air traffic control immediately by the most direct means. This normally entails the use of an initial call incorporating the word “standby”. Navigate The flight crew will decide on whether to continue the flight to the originally intended destination, initiate an immediate en route diversion, carry out an emergency descent or just place the aircraft ina safe flying position. The decision to divert may be immediate but normally it will require coordination with air traffic control and other parties. Communicate Pilots believing themselves to be facing an emergency situation should declare an emergency assoon as possible and cancel it later if the situation allows. The correct method of communicating this information to ATC is by using the prefix “MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY” or “PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN” as appropriate. This procedure, whichis an international standard, is the single most effective means of alerting the controller to the need to give priority to the message that will follow. In certain types of emergency (Fire in the Air, Loss of Cabin Pressurization...), the flight crew will don oxygen masks. The wearing of oxygen masks may make the voice messages more difficult to understand and increases the risk of a clearance being misunderstood and the risk of readback/hearback errors. Controller response to emergency situation The Operators Guide to Human Factors in Aviation Briefing Note - Pilot-ControllerCommunicationoffers the following advice: "Controllers should recognize that, when faced with an emergency situation, the flight crew’s mostimportant needs are: Time; Airspace; and, Silence." The briefing note continues: "The controller’s response to the emergency situation could bepatterned after the ASSIST memory aid...: Acknowledge - Ensure that the reported emergency is well-understood and acknowledged; Separate - Establish and maintain separation with other traffic and terrain; Silence - Impose silence on your control frequency, if necessary; and do not delay or disturb urgentcockpit action by unnecessary transmissions; Inform - Inform your supervisor and other sectors, units and airports as appropriate; Support - Provide maximum support to the flight crew; and, Time - Allow the flight crew sufficient time to manage the emergency." EUROCONTROL has produced guidelines for controller training in handling unusual or emergencysituations which contain much useful information and advice, including sample checklists forvarious types of emergency. FULL ARTICLE

Support Material

Modern aircraft are increasingly dependent on automation for safe and efficient operation. However, automation also has the potential to cause significant incidents when misunderstood or mishandled. In addition to that, automation may result in an aircraft developing an undesirable state from which it is difficult or impossible to recover using traditional hand flying techniques. Automation Advantages - Increases passenger comfort; - Improved flight control; - Systems monitoring displays coupled with diagnostic assistance systems support enhanced pilots’ and maintenance staff’s understanding of aircraft system states. - Automation can relieve pilots from repetitive tasks for which humans are less suited, though it invariably changes the pilots’ active involvement in operating the aircraft into a monitoring role, which humans are particularly poor at doing effectively or for long periods. As an example, pilots who fly with Autothrottle (AT) engaged can quickly lose the habit of scanning speed indications. - Automation reduces workload, and pilots can focus on other tasks. Flight Crew - Automation Interaction Problems - Basic manual flying skills can decline because of lack of practice and feel for the aircraft. - Unexpected automation behavior: uncommanded disengagement caused by a system failure resulting in mode reversion or inappropriate mode engagement by the pilot may lead to adverse consequences; - Pilots interacting with automation can be distracted from flying the aircraft; - Flight crews may spend too much time trying to understand the origin, conditions, or causes of an alarm or of multiple alarms, which may distract them from other priority tasks and from flying the aircraft; - Short notice changes by ATC requiring reprogramming of a departure or landing runway are potentially hazardous due to the possibility of incorrect data entry and crosschecking in a time critical situation. - Situations requiring manual override of automation are difficult to understand and manage, can create a surprise or startle effect, and can induce peaks of workload and stress. - For highly automated aircraft, problems may occur when transitioning to degraded modes (e.g. multiple failures requiring manual or less automated flight); - Errors may be more difficult to prevent and detect; - In critical situations following disconnection or failure of the automation, the alarm system only indicates the condition met but not the action to take; - It may be difficult to understand the situation and to gain/regain control when automation reaches the limit of its operation domain and disconnects or in case of automation failure; Automation Dependency Automation Dependency has commonly been described as a situation in which pilots who routinely fly aircraft with automated systems are only fully confident in their ability to control the trajectory of their aircraft when using the full functionality of such systems. Such a lack of confidence usually from a combination of inadequate knowledge of the automated systems themselves; Safety Issues Two problems arise directly from automation dependency: Firstly, affected pilots are reluctant to voluntarily reduce the extent to which they use full automation capability to deal with any situation - routine or abnormal - which arises. Secondly, if the full automation capability is for some reason no longer available or it is considered that it is no longer capable of delivering the required aircraft control, then the tendency is to seek to partially retain the use of automated systems rather than revert to manual aircraft trajectory control. The effect is often a loss of situational awareness triggered by Excessive workload for both pilots. The consequence of this is frequently a reduction in the extent to which the PM is able to effectively monitor the actions of the PF.

Support Material

A Takeoff calculation is performed before takeoff in order to confirm that the actual weight is below the maximum permissible takeoff weight at particular aerodrome in the conditions prevailing. On modern aircraft this value and the values for the various speeds can be obtained from the FMS, after feeding in the relevant data for the airfield and conditions. Following basic conditions are considered in the calculations: - Airfield elevation - Runway slope - Air temperature - Wind - Runway length and conditions - Flap configuration Using either charts or computer software the maximum permissible takeoff weight is determined and when it is confirmed that the actual weight is within the limits, it is necessary to find the takeoff speeds and thrust setting corresponding to the actual weight. Following speeds are determined or, on modern aircraft, obtained from the FMS: • V1 – decision speed, at which in case of engine failure the continued takeoff distance required, will not exceed the takeoff distance available; • VR – rotation speed, at which aircraft nose is lifted from the ground (rotated) for takeoff; • V2 – takeoff safety speed with critical engine inoperative, at which the aircraft can take of safely with critical engine inoperative. Typical takeoff calculation errors Calculating and entering takeoff performance parameters into aircraft systems involves a number of steps that create potential opportunities for errors. The following list provides examples of the types of errors that have been identified from investigations into related accidents and incidents: - the ZFW (Zero Fuel Weight) is inadvertently used instead of the TOW (Takeoff Weight) - an aircraft weight is incorrectly transcribed or transposed into an aircraft system or when referencing performance manuals; for example, a weight of 234.000 kg or 224.000 kg is used instead of 324.000 kg - V speeds are incorrectly transcribed or transposed when manually entered into an aircraft system - aircraft data from a previous flight is used to calculate the V speeds - takeoff performance parameters are not updated as a result of a change in flight conditions; for example, a change in the active runway, intersection departure or ambient temperature - selecting the incorrect value from the loadsheet or take-off data card - using the wrong performance charts for the aircraft type - inadvertently selecting the wrong table or column/row in the performance charts - using the incorrect value when referencing the performance charts - failing to convert values into the required unit of measurement (for example pounds to kilograms) Typical takeoff calculation errors consequences In the event the above errors are not detected and corrected prior to takeoff, the following adverse consequences may occur: - tailstrike: when aircraft rotation is initiated at a speed below that required for the aircraft’s weight, lift-off may not be achieved. In response, the pilot may increase the nose-up attitude of the aircraft, which may result in the tail contacting the runway - reduced takeoff performance: during the takeoff,the crew may observe that the aircraft’s performance is not as expected; the aircraft may appear ‘sluggish’ or ‘heavy’ - degraded handling qualities: after takeoff, there may be a reduced margin between the aircraft’s actual speed and the stall speed until the aircraft accelerates up to the normal climb speed. If the V2 speed is also erroneous, this may not occur until after the aircraft passes through the acceleration height - rejected takeoff: if the aircraft fails to accelerate or lift-off as expected, the crew may reject the takeoff - runway overrun: if the aircraft fails to stop after a rejected takeoff or the aircraft fails to liftoff, the aircraft rollout may extend beyond the end of the runway resulting in an overrun - TO/GA (Takeoff/Go around) engine thrust: if the aircraft fails to accelerate or lift-off as expected, the crew may select take-off/go-around (TO/GA) engine thrust (the maximum thrust that the engines will supply) - increased runway length required: early rotation increases drag and significantly increases the distance from rotation to liftoff. - overweight takeoff: this may occur if an erroneous TOW (Take Off Weight) is used to determine whether a runway is acceptable for the takeoff - reduced obstacle clearance: if the takeoff is commenced at low speed, the aircraft will not achieve the climb gradient required, and the clearance between any obstacles along the take-off path will be reduced. Read full article

Support material

DEFINITION Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of an aircraft. (Source: ICAO Doc 4444 - PANS-ATM). Note: the 'incorrect presence' may be a consequence of a failure of a pilot or vehicle driver to comply with a valid ATC clearance or their compliance with an inappropriate ATC clearance. MOST COMMON RUNWAY INCURSION TYPES - Incorrect entry of an aircraft or vehicle onto the runway protected area (without or contrary to ATC clearance or due to incorrect ATC clearance) - Incorrect presence of a vacating aircraft or vehicle onto the runway protected area - Incorrect runway crossing by an aircraft or vehicle (without or contrary to ATC clearance or due to incorrect ATC clearance) - Incorrect spacing between successive arriving or arriving and departing or departing and arriving aircraft - Landing without ATC Clearance - Take-off without ATC Clearance CONSEQUENCES The biggest risk of a runway incursion is that at least one of the aircraft involved will be travelling at high speeds which increases the chances of substantial damages or even fatal injuries. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS - Weather. Low visibility may increase the chance of flight crew becoming disorientated - Aerodrome design. If aircraft have to cross active runways to move between their take off or landing runway and their parking position, the chances of runway incursions is increased. - Conditional Clearances If conditional clearances are used, the risk of any error may be increased.. - Phraseology Use of Non-Standard Phraseology can lead to clearance confusion and misunderstanding between flight crew and controllers. - Use of More than One Language for ATC communications. At some international airports, locally-based users are permitted to communicate in the local language while foreign aircraft do so in English. - Excessive Workload.