by Steve Rehwinkel
Photo for illustration purposes only showing damage that can occur when aircraft collide with wildlife.
Steve Rehwinkel
The trip called for Jim Taylor (JT) and I to take eight passengers to our plant near Quonset, Rhode Island (yes, home of the Quonset hut) for the day and return that afternoon. JT was pilot in command for this leg.
It was January and the weather that morning in Racine, Wisconsin was above freezing, low ceiling, drizzle, the runway was wet, and there was a strong wind off of Lake Michigan. Since we were scheduled for a 6:00 am departure, it was also very dark.
We were flying a Citation 560 and we were at gross weight. For those unfamiliar with operating Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 25 aircraft, let me take a moment to explain takeoff preparations. Every takeoff requires a number of calculations. Of course we need to know our takeoff distance, but it’s different than with FAR Part 23.
When a takeoff distance is calculated, we have a number that represents acceleration with all engines operating, then having complete loss of power on one engine at decision speed (more on this later), continuing the takeoff on the remaining engine(s), and crossing the departure end of the runway at 35 feet AGL. It sounds more complicated than it is. We have plenty of charts and tables that make the calculation simple.
Next, we calculate our three (3) takeoff-related speeds: V1 or the takeoff decision speed; Vr (rotate), the speed at which we begin to pull back on the yoke; and V2, which is equivalent to the Part 23 single-engine best rate of climb speed. The pilot monitoring (PM) makes callouts of these speeds, plus a call at 70 knots that all instruments check okay.
In initial and recurrent simulator training, we are drilled on these takeoff procedures: if below V1, abort the takeoff because you can stop on the remaining runway. If above V1, continue the takeoff and handle the problem in the air. Otherwise, you’ll run off the end of the runway.
This thinking is based on taking off from a minimum-length runway and it’s a tried-and-true method of risk management in the takeoff regime. But what if you have a lot more runway than you need that day. Is a takeoff with a compromised aircraft the best decision? This argument has been around forever and it is a factor that most crews include in their takeoff briefing. It was very important for us on that January morning.
JT lined up on Runway 4 at Racine and we began the takeoff roll. I called “70 knots, crosschecks,” and then called “V1” at 87 knots (our calculation for that day). I was just about to call “Rotate” at 97 knots when we heard multiple bird strikes on the aircraft. The sound was like a muffled shotgun being rapidly fired.
By now we were somewhere above 100 knots and still on the runway. JT called for a high-speed abort. He pulled the power to idle while simultaneously applying maximum braking. (The aircraft was equipped with anti skid brakes, just like ABS on your car; a wonderful feature.)
I extended the speed brakes and JT applied maximum reverse thrust. All of these actions happened within a few seconds. Right after JT called the abort, one of the birds hit right in the center of his windshield and completely blocked his view. He was now doing a high-speed abort totally on instruments!
I immediately turned my attention to the airspeed indicator and I called speeds as we decelerated. I also watched the runway for Jim. He tracked it beautifully. At 70 knots, you’re supposed to stow the thrust reversers to reduce the chance of foreign object damage (FOD). The heck with that! We kept them deployed. If the engines die saving our lives, then it is a good day.
JT stopped the aircraft with room to spare. We cleared the runway and called Milwaukee Approach (MKE) on the remote frequency. Remember, they had given us a release and they were expecting us to show up on radar by now.
We discussed whether or not we should taxi to our hangar or shut down right there. JT’s visibility out his windshield had improved by now since the drizzle had turned to rain. Also the engine gauges all looked normal. We decided that any damage to the engines had already occurred and there was no telling how long we would have to sit there before we could get tugged in.
What a sight when we saw the aircraft. Blood was still running down the side of the nose from the strike to JT’s windshield. We had numerous other strikes. There was one on the fuselage above my windshield. The right wing leading edge was dented and there was bone material stuck into the wing deice boot. Remember, we never got much above 100 knots!
The right flap had bird material on it, but no damage. So did both sides of the tail. Both engine inlets had bloodstains as well, but somehow no birds entered either engine. Later both engines were bore-scoped and were found to be free of birds…amazing!
The airport surveyed the runway and found another dead bird. It was a mourning dove, a bird about the size of a pigeon. All told, we estimated we had six (6) strikes.
Throughout all this the passengers were just wonderful. There was no panic even though they all said they could hear the strikes. They knew why we had aborted and congratulated us.
After they surveyed the damaged we had them return to the passenger lounge and we asked one of them to call the Rhode Island plant to let them know we were okay. Since we only had two flights going out that morning, we had an extra aircraft at our disposal. We asked the passengers if they still wanted to go and they said yes, so we arrived in Quonset about two hours late.
The moral of the story is that “wildlife strikes” can be a real threat to flying, and any measures that airport management can take to eliminate nesting areas and the potential for bird strikes, should be done.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Steve Rehwinkel was born in Chicago, Illinois, and now lives in Racine, Wis., where he enjoyed a 34-year career as a pilot with Modine Manufacturing Company until he retired in 2007. He is currently the executive director of the Wisconsin Business Aviation Association (WBAA) and a founding member of the organization. Rehwinkel holds an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate and is type rated in the Lear Jet and Citation 500 series jets. He has logged 18,000 hours. Rehwinkel served in Vietnam with the U.S. Army 1st Calvary Division “Blue Max Battalion,” as a crew chief on the Bell AH1-G Cobra gunship helicopter from 1969-70.
