EASA Recommendations

建議

1.提高鳥擊報告的捕獲率和完整性。
2. 通過監測高於 KE 認證當量值的鳥擊比例，監測各類飛機鳥擊風險的增長情況。
3. 鑑於在控制 Canada Goose 種群方面取得了明顯的成功，目前在機場控制鳥類
的努力應該繼續下去，並且可能會根據 FAA AC 150/5200-33B，機場內或附近的
危險野生動物引誘劑的建議進行擴展。應繼續尋求其他選擇。
4. 調查表 5-1 中列出的引起高 KE 影響的其他鳥類的種群趨勢，以確定是否應將
上述控制措施擴展到這些物種。
5.調查直升機擋風玻璃鳥擊穿入比例高，尤其是 KE 低於 CS-29 要求的，要求的
變化是否能有效降低發生率。眾所周知，目前的大部分機隊都早於 CS-29 的要
求。
6. 理想情況下，引入要求 CS-23 和 CS-27 類飛機能夠承受 2lb/1kg 鳥的擋風玻璃
撞擊的要求將是首選方案。然而，由於擋風玻璃面積相對較高（成本和性能損
失）和所涉及的較長時間尺度，這對於這些飛機類型可能是不切實際的。因此，
考慮要求直升機飛行員佩戴頭盔和面罩，以減輕擋風玻璃鳥擊穿透的影響。
7. 對於未來的飛機認證，考慮修改 5670 公斤以上的 CS-23 通勤級雙渦輪螺旋槳
飛機的規定，以增加鳥擊要求，以匹配 5670 公斤以上的其他飛機（即 CS-25 要
求）
8. 考慮開發基於風險的模型，利用本報告中提供的信息預測未來風險水平，以
支持監管決策。
9. 應更詳細地研究由多次鳥擊（可能涉及成群的鳥類）造成的預載效應以及對
監管制度的潛在影響。
10. 對於大型飛機，法規的相關部分（即第 25.631 條）被擴展為明確包括起落
架作為飛機結構的一部分。
11. 考慮為目前根據 CS-23（普通）飛機要求認證的 VLJ 飛機提供鳥擊保護要求。
1. Improve the capture rate and completeness of bird strike reporting.
2. Monitor the growth in bird strike risk for each category of aircraft by monitoring
the proportion of bird strikes above the certification equivalent value of KE.
3. Given the apparent success in controlling Canada Goose populations, the
current efforts on bird control at airports should continue and perhaps be
expanded in line with the recommendations of FAA AC 150/5200-33B,
Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports. Other options should
continue to be pursued.
4. Investigate the trends in population of other birds listed in Table 5-1 as causing
high KE impacts, to determine if the above control measures should be
extended to these species.
5. Investigate the high proportion of helicopter windshield bird strike penetrations,
especially those with KE below the CS-29 requirements, and whether changes in
requirements could effectively reduce the occurrence rate. It is recognised that
much of the current fleet pre-dates the CS-29 requirements.
6. Ideally, the introduction of a requirement that both CS-23 and CS-27 category
aircraft be capable of surviving a windshield impact with a 2lb/1kg bird would
be the preferred option. However, due to the relatively high windshield areas
(cost and performance penalty) and the long timescales involved, this may be
impracticable for these aircraft types. Therefore, consider requiring helicopter
pilots to wear helmets and visors to mitigate the effects of windshield bird strike
penetrations.
7. For future aircraft certification, consider revising the regulations for CS-23
Commuter class twin turboprop aircraft above 5670 kg to increase bird strike
requirements to match those of other aircraft above 5670 kg (i.e. CS-25
requirements)
8. Consider the development of a risk-based model utilising the information
presented in this report to provide projections of future risk levels in support of
regulatory decision making.
9. The effects of preloading resulting from multiple bird strikes (possibly involving
flocking birds) and the potential impact on the regulatory regime, should be
examined in more detail.
10. For large aeroplanes, the relevant part of the regulations (i.e. clause 25.631) be
extended to explicitly include landing gear as part of the aircraft structure.
11. Consider introducing requirements for the protection of bird strikes offered to
VLJ aircraft currently certified under the CS-23 (Normal) aircraft requirements.