Is There Really No Way to Keep a Goose Out of a Jet Engine?

It probably won't happen with the current tube-and-wing design paradigm, but a blended-wing airplane (such as the B-2 Stealth bomber) buries its engines inside the aircraft, thus leaving no openings (or very small ones) for birds to get sucked into. The F-117 Nighthawk's air intakes are screened, more for stealth purposes, but even so it's not quite correct that you couldn't shroud the engines; again, it needs to be designed as part of the airplane. The MiG-29 features secondary intakes located on top (vs. in front), as it was designed to operate from lousy airfields; the designers didn't want the engines to ingest ground FOD, allowing the pilot to close the forward intakes.

I am not an engineer nor an ornithologist, so this is probably a silly idea. But nonetheless, I have read that one of the problems is the jets, as loud as they are, can not be heard by the Geese when they are in front of it. Why not install small loudspeakers in the nose and blast Great Horned Owl sounds ahead of the jet? Wouldn't this alert them and frighten the geese away?

Grab a Goose, Set up Electrodes to the Auditory part of its brain. Set off a Fire Cracker if that is effective. Copy the Frequency of Data given off by the Birds Mind, And the have Airports reanimate that frequency, So the Birds Mind Mentally "hears" Firecrackers, without any actual sound. Its that Simple... however cruel.

You're talking in pure science fiction, FX. You'll notice that any type of research involving brain activity doesn't measure "brainwave frequencies," it measures brain activity; what part of the brain is active and to what level. Simply beaming electromagnetic frequencies at the duck or goose, even prerecorded "brain frequency data" will do nothing; the brain will treat it the same way it already treats the enormous amount of electromagnetic data passing through it at any given moment from cell phone, radio, television, satellite signals, etc; it will ignore it.

Loudspeakers won't help at high speeds - because a plane flies almost as fast as sound, a goose could only hear it seconds before it hit them. Also, the birds don't realize the turbines will suck them in from yards away.

What a about a medium power laser to vaporize the 14lb organic bird (much easier than vaporizing a metallic missle for example)? Seems radar/laser systems have shrunk considerably for defense and might be light enough for commercial planes to actually vaporize birds on commercial flights? Just a thought ha.

qlmmb2086, Science Fiction eventually Leads to Fact.

You should read the very old Article " The Memory Hacker "

He can copy, store, reanimate anything the brain does. Record an instance of you staring at the computer screen, and then send it back into the mind, and like FCC rules 15 you Must accept it. You would be in a prison, repeating the same moment over and over.For Life.

Why not use a deploying clamshell like the reverse thrusters, only on the front of the engine?

DarkFx,

In the experiment you are referring to, the device in question is capable of electronically stimulating a section of brain tissue in ways that mimic the frequency data the tissue is producing. This is anything but your theoretical remote brain imprinting pipe dream; the device requires physical contact with the brain tissue and can only interface with whatever area of the brain it is connected to.

Comparing your theory to the experiment contained in that article is akin to using the old experiments in which frog legs were made to move by electronic stimulation as proof that I can beam electromagnetic radiation at your arm and force it to slap you across the face. There are major stumbling blocks in that sort of logical overextension.

Electrical stimulation and electromagnetic radiation are vastly different mediums. Electrons can be made to force nerve cells, including those found in the brain, into activity. Electromagnetic radiation, however, simply passes on through. You would have to implant some sort of "translator" device into the brains of every duck on the planet in order to convert the electromagnetic signals into usable electronic stimulation. If you must use the FCC as an example, consider this; electromagnetic radiation, when beamed at an electronic device, does not force that device into a specific state; it simply interferes with the device's function, even if you are beaming back the emissions of an identical device.

Forcing nerve cells into activity is not the same as controlling their function. Think back to the frog leg example; even if I could remotely stimulate the nerves in your arm, I could only make the arm twitch. I can't give it any measure of intelligent control. Why? Because even if you can radiate a signal that will interfere with nerve cells, that signal is going to pass through every nerve cell in the arm, not just the ones you want to stimulate.

I have worked on both Jets and Helicopters in the military, and the small "Inlet Particle Separators" that the helicopters employ is probably the closest thing you will come to deterring anything into a jet engine. Anything that you put in "front" of the intake of a jet engine becomes a FOD (Foerign Object Damage) issue PERIOD. You disrupt the smooth planned airflow to a engine, you sacrifice thrust, and can cause flameouts and combustion stalls. As far as putting a lazer on the aircraft, really? A jet flying at 200 knots towards something the size of a large watermelon, especially as far as civilian aviation is concerned, no one will put the time, or money into such an advanced system to accomplish that task. Your talking lots of wires, and some pretty fancy avionics to make a task like that happen.

I truely think the best thing they can do is be informed of flocks of birds, be it from Air controllers or from some upgraded radars on the aircraft, which are in a specific bird find / warning mode when at or below say 1500 feet like most radar altimiters operate.

Keeping a goose out of the thrust fan would be virtually impossible. But keeping it out of the turbine engine should not be that difficult, but the economics would probably not be that great. A turbine engine is no doubt most efficient with ram air feeding the turbine. But the inlet does not have to be aligned in the direction of flight. Maybe manage air flow into the turbine with something like multiple large side mounted NASA style (not sure the technical name)air inlet? The inertia of the Goose would make it pass by the inlets.

Couldn't a more-or-less cone-shaped device be designed that would deflect birds and still allow maximum airflow?

Beyond the fact that any screen would create turbulence and inhibit free-flowing air from entering the engine, thus weakening its thrust, if the screen broke on impact, it too could be sucked into the engine and cause even more damage, DeFusco says.http://www.viptravesti.net

Loudspeakers won't help at high speeds - because a plane flies almost as fast as sound, a goose could only hear it seconds before it hit them. Also, the birds don't realize the turbines will suck them in from yards away.
-------------------
Ali EREN- http://www.playstationturk.net