What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Bubble canopy bird strike mitigation

Radioflyer

Well Known Member
I am just terrified of hitting a bird in flight and having it penetrate the canopy and into my face. This has happened in the past (not yet to me), has been reported here very recently. and will continue to happen. There must be something that can be done to better protect occupants in a bubble canopy.

What comes to mind is application of a tough transparent film on the forward part of the canopy. I know there are films designed to control and contain shards of glass from an impacted sliding glass door. However, these films will not conform to the compound curves of a bubble canopy. There are also various forms of a more stretchy polyurethane tape (colloquially known as helicopter tape and used on leading edges of blades) that is none-yellowing, transparent, and tough.

There has to be a polyurethane film material that can meet the requirements. It won't stop canopy breakage, but will mitigate the shards and impact force to the face. Another solution is to attach a second layer of conformally molded polycarbonate plastic to the aft side of the canopy. Of course, one can always wear a helmet and visor...but a canopy lamination of some form seems more practical overall.
 
Sounds like you need to build a “chicken gun” and do some testing!
 
Last edited:
I have hit a bird in my aa1 and lucky form me it hit the wing. No fun at all. Scary.

D
 
Even if you could stop a canopy from breaking, it will still deform on impact. Considering that most RV canopies are within inches of your head, it's easy to see that you are likely to be injured or knocked out in the right scenario. Short of being very careful and very lucky, I suspect the brute force technique is the most likely to be successful. I came to this conclusion after taking a bird through the windscreen of the -8 and earning a permanent scar thanks to a face full of plexi shards. The replacement windscreen was a shallow sloped flat wrap of .250 thickness. Wont stop a turkey buzzard, but it ups my chances in a repeat. The Rocket will eventually get a similarly sloped windscreen, but it will be .500 thick owing to the higher speed.
 
Bird strike is a popular topic in the rotorcraft safety world right now. Use of Wig Wag or pulsing lights is being presented (with some scientific study behind it) as a way to prevent bird strikes. It may be less effective at RV speeds though, I have not read the studies. Wig Wag landing lights may also help prevent large bird strikes (other airplanes) as well...
 
plastic film

I've only seen the plastic film used on flat glass or on car windshields. I have not seen if using a bit of heat would help shape it better, or if perhaps using strips would work. This stuff is very tough, that's for sure.

I called the guy that make the thicker windscreens for the RV8, and he essentially talked me out of it, saying that his view is that it won't make a huge difference. I think the plastic film on both sides of a flat wrap windscreen would be the strongest and easiest.

I totally agree that we should find a way to add more protection to the windscreens. Sounds like another business opportunity!
 
More than a few people always wear helmets when they fly to protect against birds and other risks.

Yep, came within ~50' of an eagle a week or so ago. Not sure if it was deliberately diving on me, came from above. His wing span looked big enough to wrap right around my fuse! Have been wearing my helmet ever since.
 
Yeah, what prompted this topic was that during my last flight I had to make an evasive maneuver to avoid a small group of birds, gulls I think. My face is just about 5" from that thin canopy acrylic plastic. I wish it were polycarbonate, although given he enormous kinetic energy of even a small bird I doubt thin polycarbonate plastic will be strong enough. I gotta do something though, but I think that the canopy manufacturers have more resources than I to look into this and to make their own chicken canons. It's a business opportunity for them.

PS- For example, they could at least offer something like a 1 square foot molded section of 1/4" or so thick plastic to mount on the aft surface of the canopy in front of the pilots face. I think that would definitely help.
 
Last edited:
USAF T-37 bird issues

Polycarbonate layered windscreens were tried on Tweets.

Supposedly it could handle a 2 pound bird at 300 knots, or a 300 pound bird at 2 knots. :)

Vern
 
Me too !

I have a little bit of a phobia to with having two friends in the last 3 to 4 years have had birdstrikes that broke the windscreen, One in Florida one here in Ontario ,, my current ride is a slider which I think gives some protection in that the sliding portion would very likely survive a hawk or seagull impact, all bets are off on something bigger:(
When I found my current project it was a quick build tipper so I spent the extra 400 bucks to convert it to a slider because of my phobia! I?m surprised that this is not an option for RV 14 builders ,
I have a set of 5400 lumin ridged Industry side spot lights to mount in my wing tips that will have a wig wag System since I find the guys that have them are way more visible than what I currently have!
Now , Are we all happy we can?t fly faster?
 
I wear a Bonehead Helmet when flying..

I have had several close encounters and try ro wear a Bonehead Helmet w visor when flying as much as possible. Light weight and barely noticeable...no expensive audio installed...Just my Clarity Aloft under the helmet very confortable.
 
Yeah, what prompted this topic was that during my last flight I had to make an evasive maneuver to avoid a small group of birds, gulls I think. My face is just about 5" from that thin canopy acrylic plastic. I wish it were polycarbonate, although given he enormous kinetic energy of even a small bird I doubt thin polycarbonate plastic will be strong enough. I gotta do something though, but I think that the canopy manufacturers have more resources than I to look into this and to make their own chicken canons. It's a business opportunity for them.

PS- For example, they could at least offer something like a 1 square foot molded section of 1/4" or so thick plastic to mount on the aft surface of the canopy in front of the pilots face. I think that would definitely help.

At the risk of repeating a story........
Polycarbonate is not an automatic solution. It is more shatter resistant than acrylic but for the same reason, polycarb will deflect more than acrylic.

SO...back in Aero Eng classes, we were shown the F-16 canopy chicken cannon tests on the polycarb canopy development. The canopy never broke, but it did deflect enough to (assumingly) kill the pilot. The solution was to increase the canopy thickness just enough to leave the pilot with a raging headache, but not dead. If memory serves, the final thickness was 5/8".
 
Working on it!

Since there is so much interest in this, I've been planning to make just the windshield portion for the RV8 out of 3/8ths material. I'll need to get the dimensions from a finished RV8 windshield. Now that this has been brought up again, I'm going to bring this project front and center.
 
Since there is so much interest in this, I've been planning to make just the windshield portion for the RV8 out of 3/8ths material. I'll need to get the dimensions from a finished RV8 windshield. Now that this has been brought up again, I'm going to bring this project front and center.

A few years ago I saw a picture of an RV-8 with a combination flat front screen and curved front sides - very much like a P-51.

I thought it looked much nicer than our curved windshield and it would allow the ability to have thicker material on the center flat section.
 
It's fairly common on Rockets with sliding canopies to have a flat-wrapped fixed portion of the windscreeen. That would simplify making the forward portion out of a different material at least, as it would be a flat wrap.
 
A different viewpoint for the discussion.....

Not intended to downplay anyones desire to modify their canopy for better bird strike protection, but I tend to look at this and other risk factors while flying, using statistical data.

The #1 cause of accidents in experimental amateur built aircraft is loss of control (low level stall / spin, etc.)

The second is engine failure (because of construction error or maint. related). This one often leads to the #1 reason being a factor as well.

Accidents from bird strikes are way down at the bottom of the list. Now if we consider that a lot of the bird related accidents with RV's occur in specific circumstances (High speed at low altitude, part of a formation group, sometimes both together), then if we avoid these situations in our flying, we have moved a rare occurrence to to an even lower level of likelihood.

<My experience is that birds are quite good at avoiding RV's if they can see you (I fly with bright wig/wag lights on at all times..... day or night) If they have time (if you are not too fast), and if they don't have to avoid a bunch of different airplanes at the same time. Now if it is an attack situation..... well, some things we can't do much about, but it seems extremely rare. It is the first instance I have ever heard of.>

I admit that there will always be some level of risk with birds. My point is that it is very low compared to a lot of other things that we can easily have a direct influence on, but rare discuss here in the forums (or when we do, some people get offended and things get nasty).
The accident records and follow on discussions are full of stories about pilots that were known by all of their peers to have been excellent pilots.... they were a CFI... had done many first flights, etc., etc., and they were killed because of a low level loss of control accident. Everyone was in total disbelief that it could happen to them.

My main point is, there is nothing wrong with analyzing our aircraft and looking for ways to make them safer, but it might be far more productive to focus on the things that are the cause of most accidents. If loss of control happens to a lot of people that were considered to be very experienced and skilled pilots, discussing ways for us average guys to avoid the same fate should be at he top of our priority list.
 
material specific solution?

If I may throw in some material observations;

most of the optically clear laminates were developed for glazing, thus are NOT stretchy, and won't conform to the compound curves of a canopy. All the folks referring to 'flat wraps' are on the right track...... I think if someone wants to put a laminate on the face or inside of a windshield.

The vinyl, PVC and other conformable products are typically only 1 or 2 mil thick, and would give minimal support to an impact that is capable of cracking polycarb or acrylic. Their soft character also means they scratch and scuff easily.

the final downside....you are looking THROUGH whatever adhesive is bonding the laminate to the windshield, thus there is some distortion, UV aging and other negatives that go along with it.
 
Not intended to downplay anyones desire to modify their canopy for better bird strike protection, but I tend to look at this and other risk factors while flying, using statistical data.

The #1 cause of accidents in experimental amateur built aircraft is loss of control (low level stall / spin, etc.)

The second is engine failure (because of construction error or maint. related). This one often leads to the #1 reason being a factor as well...

This is all well and good, but I have yet to experience a low level loss of control (despite spending plenty of time in the "higher risk" camp), nor have I have an engine failure... I have had a few bird strikes and plenty of near misses though. Even with strobes flashing and LED landing lights wagin', I've encountered birds and had to take evasive action from cruise altitude all the way down to ground level.

Statistics are fine but personal experience tends to bias one's views substantially.
 
Spinner paint.

I've seen British military trainers with one third of the sinner painted a contrasting color. They claim that the 'strobe' effect gets their attention because they can see it moving, but not when it's a solid color.
Best,
 
I agree with Toolbuilder. Besides, I doubt that many of the bird strikes already reported on this and other discussions even made it into the official statistics database. Statistics refer to a population, not an individual pilot. If that pilot feels his greatest threat in his flight environment are bird strikes, then that is what he needs to address first. While flying safely and with a good running engine, I really would hate for a bird to ruin my day, especially if there is some fix I could devise. Btw, this danger is especially true in a pusher aircraft, I would think.

This is all well and good, but I have yet to experience a low level loss of control (despite spending plenty of time in the "higher risk" camp), nor have I have an engine failure... I have had a few bird strikes and plenty of near misses though. Even with strobes flashing and LED landing lights wagin', I've encountered birds and had to take evasive action from cruise altitude all the way down to ground level.

Statistics are fine but personal experience tends to bias one's views substantially.
 
Besides, I doubt that many of the bird strikes already reported on this and other discussions even made it into the official statistics database. Statistics refer to a population, not an individual pilot. If that pilot feels his greatest threat in his flight environment are bird strikes, then that is what he needs to address first. While flying safely and with a good running engine, I really would hate for a bird to ruin my day, especially if there is some fix I could devise. Btw, this danger is especially true in a pusher aircraft, I would think.

I am aware that a lot don't get reported.
I am basing my statement on other info that I have access to. Largely because of where I work:rolleyes:

If that pilot feels his greatest threat in his flight environment are bird strikes, then that is what he needs to address first. While flying safely and with a good running engine, I really would hate for a bird to ruin my day, especially if there is some fix I could devise. Btw, this danger is especially true in a pusher aircraft, I would think.

Yes, it is a personal decision, but that is the whole point of my post. To get people to think. Because if a person think that a bird strike is there greatest flight risk, they are mistaken.

BTW, a tractor prop will do very little to mitigate a bird getting to a wind screen vs a pusher airplane. objects pass through a spinning propeller quite easily without getting hit. If you do the math it makes it obvious why.
 
If we are getting into the area of probabilities some attention should be paid to location. I'm in Florida and man do we have birds, and worse still, lots of big ones.
 
More blades

...BTW, a tractor prop will do very little to mitigate a bird getting to a wind screen vs a pusher airplane. objects pass through a spinning propeller quite easily without getting hit. If you do the math it makes it obvious why.
Agreed - we need more blades on our props. :D

Most pilots like to have the wheel, the stick, the handlebars, whatever, and like the feeling of control. All the larger risks you mentioned are under the pilot's control, and have already been taken into consideration. Random risks, no matter how small, get a lot of attention - rightly or wrongly - since the pilot does not have much control over them.

I know that if I had some magic film I could put on my windscreen that would keep a bird out, I'd buy it. I'd probably do it even if I knew at the back of my mind it was a placebo.
 
When doing my research regarding wig wag lights I came across a link in the VAF forums about a study done by Qantas Airlines. In that report they had equipped some of their commercial jet fleet with wig wags. In the end they concluded there was a 10%-50% reduction in bird encounters/strikes on jets equipped with wig wags. I don't know how they came up with the numbers but it suits me. I ended up with baja designs spot LED's.... super bright. I feel if birds see you coming they will do their best to get out of the way by most always diving. With that said, I've also come uncomfortably close a few times even with wig wags. Most of my encounters have been in the airport environment during the landing phase at much lower speeds.
 
If we are getting into the area of probabilities some attention should be paid to location. I'm in Florida and man do we have birds, and worse still, lots of big ones.

Same for the (Texas) Gulf Coast region. Over the last few decades, all bird populations have increased significantly, including the (big!) brown pelicans. Most are low flyers. But I pass a lot of hawks, eagles, and vultures up in the 3, 4 and 5,000' agl regions.

This subject is important and has been batted around before. I personally just try to keep an eye ahead, because there's not much that can mitigate the effects of a 5-lb bird in your face short of some serious Lexan or other very strong devices. Sure, a helmet protects your face. But what about your neck when you take 5-lbs to the head at 75-100-mph? I'm not sure that's survivable.
 
Here in Massachusetts we have huge squadrons of Canadian geese and we are also on a migrant bird flyway so one has to keep a sharp lookout. Geese are not 5 pound birds. Ducks can do a number on you as well.

The glancing windshield looks to be the most useful mod one can make...like glancing tank armor.
 
Here in Western Oregon as well.......

The Willamette Valley is a major migratory flyway for Canada Geese.
The valley is also the year around home to a large population of Eagles and Hawks. Along the entire coast line is a high density of Gulls Herons, and Pelicans (and many other smaller water fowl) as well, so we are not inexperienced in the dangers of large flying creatures.
 
biz opportunity

I'm confident that Allan N. will come up with a new product to help mitigate the risk of bird strikes. Allan?
 
Back
Top