AC - 150 - 5200-32B - Wildlife Aircraft Strikes
AC - 150 - 5200-32B - Wildlife Aircraft Strikes
AC - 150 - 5200-32B - Wildlife Aircraft Strikes
Department
Advisory
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration Circular
Subject: Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes Date: 5/31/2013 AC No: 150/5200-32B
Initiated by: AAS-300 Change:
1. Purpose.
This Advisory Circular (AC) explains the importance of reporting collisions between aircraft and
wildlife, more commonly referred to as wildlife strikes. It also explains recent improvements in
the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Bird/Other Wildlife Strike Reporting system, how
to report a wildlife strike, what happens to the wildlife strike report data, how to access the FAA
National Wildlife Strike Database (NWSD), and the FAA’s Feather Identification program.
2. Applicability.
The FAA provides the standards and practices in this AC as guidance for all public-use airports,
aviation industry personnel (e.g., Air Traffic Control, pilots and airline personnel, and engine
manufacturers), and others who possess strike information. The FAA strongly recommends that
the above aviation representatives and others possessing strike information participate in
reporting.
3. Cancellation.
This AC cancels AC 150/5200-32A, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes, dated December 22,
2004.
4. Background.
The FAA has long recognized the threat to aviation safety posed by wildlife strikes. Each year
in the United States, wildlife strikes to U.S. civil aircraft cause about $718 million in damage to
aircraft and about 567,000 hours of civil aircraft down time. For the period 1990 to 2011, over
115,000 wildlife strikes were reported to the FAA. About 97 percent of all wildlife strikes
reported to the FAA involved birds, about 2 percent involved terrestrial mammals, and less than
1 percent involved flying mammals (bats) and reptiles. Waterfowl (ducks and geese), gulls, and
raptors (mainly hawks and vultures) are the bird species that cause the most damage to civil
aircraft in the United States, while European starlings are responsible for the greatest loss of
human life. Vultures and waterfowl cause the most losses to U.S. military aircraft.
Studies have shown that strike reporting has steadily increased over the past two decades;
however, strike reporting is not consistent across all stakeholders (pilots, air carriers, airport
operators, air traffic control personnel, etc.) in the National Airspace System. Although larger
14 CFR Part 139 airports and those with well-established wildlife programs have improved strike
reporting, there is a wide disparity in overall reporting rates between Part 139 airports and
general aviation (GA) airports in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). Less
than 6 percent of total strike reports come from NPIAS GA airports, whose reporting rates
average less than 1/20th the rates at Part 139 airports. Most Part 139 airports (97 percent) have
AC 150/5200-32B 5/31/2013
reported at least one strike into the database through 2011, while only 43 percent of NPIAS GA
airports have documented a strike into the database.
While overall reporting rates are much higher for strikes at Part 139 airports than at NPIAS GA
airports, there is also a major disparity in reporting rates among Part 139 airports. Larger Part
139 airports, especially those with well-established wildlife hazard management programs, have
reporting rates about four times higher on average compared to other Part 139 airports. The
pattern of disparity in strike reporting among Part 139 airports is also found in reporting rates for
commercial air carriers. However, the FAA believes the current voluntary reporting rate is
adequate to track national trends in wildlife strikes, to determine the hazard level of wildlife
species that are being struck, and to provide a scientific foundation for FAA policies and
guidance about the mitigation of risk from wildlife strikes.
Ultimately, improvements can be made in the quantity and quality of strike reporting. In addition
to the above-mentioned gaps in reporting to the NWSD, there is an overall bias toward the
reporting of damaging strikes compared to non-damaging strikes, especially for NPIAS GA
airports and certain Part 139 airports. The quality of data within a strike report can also be
improved by providing as much information as possible, including species struck and cost of
strike.
The FAA has initiated several programs to address this important safety issue, including the
collection, analysis, and dissemination of wildlife strike data. The effectiveness of a Wildlife
Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) to reduce wildlife hazards both on and near an airport and
the reevaluation of all facets of damaging/non-damaging strikes from year to year requires
accurate and consistent reporting. Therefore, every WHMP should include a commitment to
document and report to the NWSD all wildlife strikes that occur within the separation distances
described in sections 1-2 and 1-3 of Advisory Circular 150/5200-33, Hazardous Attractants On
or Near Airports (current version), to better identify, understand, and reduce threats to safe
aviation.
2
5/31/2013 AC 150/5200-32B
(2) On a taxiway or anywhere else on or off the airport that you have reason to
believe was the result of a strike with an aircraft. Examples might be:
(i) A bird found in pieces from a prop strike on a taxiway.
(ii) A carcass retrieved within 1 mile of an airport on the final approach or
departure path after someone reported the bird falling out of the sky and a report of a probable
wildlife strike.
d. The presence of birds or other wildlife on or off the airport had a significant negative
effect on a flight (i.e., aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high-speed emergency stop, or the
aircraft left pavement area to avoid collision with wildlife).
Note: These forms are to be used to report strikes that do not have bird remains associated
with them (instructions with addresses for sending remains to the Smithsonian Institute Feather
Identification Lab are discussed in Paragraph 11, Instructions for Collecting and Submitting
Bird/Wildlife Remains for Identification, of this AC). Please do not send bird remains to the FAA.
Analyses of data from the FAA NWSD have proved invaluable in determining the nature and
severity of the aviation wildlife strike hazard. The database provides a scientific basis for
identifying risk factors, justifying and implementing corrective actions at airports, and judging the
effectiveness of those corrective actions. Table 1 below depicts the ranking of 50 bird and
mammal species or groups by their relative hazard to aircraft in airport environments. The data
for the analysis are from the NWSD. The database is invaluable to engine manufacturers,
aeronautical engineers, and wildlife biologists as they develop new technologies for the aviation
industry. Each wildlife strike report contributes to the accuracy and effectiveness of the
database. Moreover, each report contributes to the common goal of increasing aviation safety
and reducing the cost of wildlife strikes.
3
AC 150/5200-32B 5/31/2013
Bird strike identification using feathers, DNA, or other body parts or materials from birds
involved in bird-aircraft strikes will be provided free-of-charge to all U.S. airport operators, all
U.S. aircraft owners/operators (regardless of where the strike happened), and to any foreign air
carrier if the strike occurred at a U.S. airport.
11. Instructions for Collecting and Submitting Bird/Wildlife Remains for Identification.
Please observe the following guidelines for collecting and submitting feathers or other
bird/wildlife remains for species identification. These guidelines help maintain species
identification accuracy, reduce turn-around time, and ensure a comprehensive FAA National
Wildlife Aircraft Strike Database. Many airports have found it beneficial to construct strike
reporting kits for use by airport personnel and aircraft operators. Having pre-made kits available
improves strike reporting and encourages the sampling of strike remains. A kit suitable for
collecting remains from most strikes would include the following materials stored in a 1-quart,
re-sealable plastic bag: (1) collection instructions, (2) a pre-packaged alcohol hand-wipe for
softening/removing tissue/blood (“snarge”1) off of the aircraft, (3) a Whatman FTA® collection
card for preserving blood/tissue for DNA identification, and (4) a pair of disposable gloves.
1
Snarge is the term used for the residue and feathers left on an aircraft after an animal
(typically a bird) collides with it.
4
5/31/2013 AC 150/5200-32B
a. Collect and submit remains from known/suspected bird strikes or strike remains that
involved an unknown animal from each impact location as soon as possible and send to the
Feather Lab (Smithsonian). If remains are known to be other than those of birds, please contact
the Smithsonian before mailing them at (202) 633-0801. Collect remains using the criteria listed
in item c below. If you cannot send the remains as soon as possible, refrigerate or freeze them
in a sealed plastic bag until you can mail them.
5
AC 150/5200-32B 5/31/2013
If you send fresh blood/ tissue samples frequently for DNA identification, you may want to
consider getting Whatman FTA® DNA cards. The material is sampled with a sterile applicator
and placed onto the surface of the card that “fixes” the DNA in the sample. For more information
about ordering these items, contact the Feather Lab. Otherwise, if you only occasionally send
blood/ tissue samples, consider using a paper towel soaked with alcohol or an alcohol wipe to
collect this type of material. Ethanol is the preferred type of alcohol.
For Material Sent via Express Mail Service: For Material Sent via US Postal Service:
(This can be identified as “safety investigation (Not recommended for priority cases.)
material”.)
The species identification turn-around time is usually 24 hours from receipt if sufficient material
is submitted and unless the sample is submitted for DNA analysis. DNA results usually take 6 to
10 days. Once processed, the lab sends the reports and species identification information to the
Database Manager for entry into the FAA National Wildlife Strike Database. Persons wishing to
be notified of the species identification must include contact information (e-mail, phone, etc.) on
the report.
For more information contact the FAA National Wildlife Biologist at (202) 267-8731 or the
Smithsonian’s Feather Identification Lab at (202) 633-0801.
Michael J. O’Donnell
Director, Office of Airport Safety and Standard
6
FORM APPROVED OMB No. 2120-0045
Exp. 7/31/2013
Email Phone
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300 BUSINESS REPLY MAIL
FIRST CLASS PERMIT NO. 12438 WASHINGTON D.C.
9
AC 150/5200-32B 5/31/2013
Table 1. Composite ranking (1 = most hazardous, 50 = least hazardous) and relative hazard
score of 50 wildlife species with at least 100 reported strikes with civil aircraft based on three
criteria (damage, major damage, and effect-on-flight). Data were derived from the FAA National
Wildlife Strike Database.
% of strikes with:
Mean Relative
Major Effect on hazard Composite hazard
Wildlife species Damage1 damage2 flight3 level4 ranking score5
White-tailed deer 84 36 46 55 1 100
Snow goose 77 41 39 53 2 95
Turkey vulture 51 19 35 35 3 63
Canada goose 50 17 28 31 4 57
Sandhill crane 41 13 27 27 5 48
Bald eagle 41 12 28 27 6 48
D.-crested cormorant 34 15 24 24 7 44
Mallard 23 9 13 15 8 27
Osprey 22 7 15 15 9 26
Great blue heron 21 6 16 15 10 26
American coot 24 7 11 14 11 25
Coyote 9 2 21 11 12 19
Red-tailed hawk 15 5 11 10 13 19
Cattle egret 10 3 15 9 14 17
Great horned owl 15 3 6 8 15 14
Herring gull 10 5 9 8 16 14
Rock pigeon 10 4 10 8 17 14
Ring-billed gull 8 3 8 6 18 11
American crow 8 3 8 6 18 11
Peregrine falcon 8 2 5 5 20 9
Laughing gull 5 2 7 5 21 8
American robin 7 1 4 4 22 7
Snow bunting 1 1 9 4 23 7
Red fox 3 0 8 4 23 7
European starling 4 1 5 3 25 6
Amer. golden-plover 4 2 4 3 26 6
Barn owl 4 2 3 3 27 5
Upland sandpiper 4 1 4 3 27 5
Purple martin 5 1 2 3 29 5
5/31/2013 AC 150/5200-32B
% of strikes with:
Mean Relative
Major Effect on hazard Composite hazard
Wildlife species Damage1 damage2 flight3 level4 ranking score5
Mourning dove 3 1 4 3 30 5
Red-winged
3 0 5 3 31 5
blackbird
Woodchuck 2 0 4 2 32 4
Northern harrier 2 1 2 2 33 3
Chimney swift 2 0 2 1 34 2
Killdeer 1 0 2 1 35 2
House sparrow 2 0 1 1 35 2
Blk-tailed jackrabbit 1 1 1 1 37 2
American kestrel 1 <1 2 1 38 2
Eastern meadowlark 1 <1 2 1 38 2
S.-tailed flycatcher 0 0 2 1 40 1
Horned lark 1 <1 1 1 41 1
Pacific golden-plover 1 0 1 1 41 1
Barn swallow 1 0 1 1 43 1
Savannah sparrow 1 0 <1 1 43 1
Common nighthawk 1 0 1 1 45 1
Tree swallow 0 0 1 <1 46 1
Burrowing owl 1 0 0 <1 46 1
Western kingbird 0 0 1 <1 48 0
Virginia opossum 1 0 0 <1 48 0
Striped skunk 0 0 0 0 50 0
1
Aircraft incurred at least some damage (destroyed, substantial, minor, or unknown) from strike.
2
Aircraft incurred damage or structural failure, which adversely affected the structure strength, performance, or flight
characteristics, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, or the
damage sustained made it inadvisable to restore aircraft to airworthy condition.
3
Aborted takeoff, engine shutdown, precautionary landing, or other negative effect on flight.
4
Based on the mean value for percent of strikes with damage, major damage (substantial damage or destroyed), and
negative effect-on-flight.
5
Mean hazard level (see footnote 4) was scaled down from 100, with 100 as the score for the species with the
maximum mean hazard level and thus the greatest potential hazard to aircraft.
11