Bird strikes pose a significant risk to aviation, with an estimated 14,000 incidents occurring annually in the United States alone. These collisions cost U.S. airlines approximately $1.2 billion per year, and while birds typically suffer the worst damage, the impact on aircraft—especially jet engines—can be severe. A single bird strike can lead to engine failure, posing a serious safety hazard, particularly during takeoff and landing.
Between 1990 and 2015, a USDA National Wildlife Research Center study found that 17,494 jet engines were damaged in 16,694 bird-strike incidents in the U.S. Given the global scale of commercial aviation, bird ingestion remains an ongoing challenge for jet engine safety.
Wouldn’t a Grate or Screen Protect Jet Engines?
At first glance, adding a protective grate or mesh screen over jet engine intakes seems like a simple solution—after all, vacuum cleaners and other air-intake systems use filters to prevent debris from entering. However, jet engines operate under entirely different conditions, making this approach impractical.
Historically, early designs attempted to incorporate such features. The Me-262, an early German jet aircraft, had circular intake screens, but they were quickly abandoned due to their negative impact on performance. Similarly, Soviet fighters like the MiG-29 and Su-27 used retractable intake screens to prevent Foreign Object Damage (FOD) when operating from rough airstrips, but this design was only useful in specific scenarios.
Why Don’t Commercial Jets Use Grates?
There are three main reasons why jet engines do not have protective grates:
- Impact Forces Are Too Strong
- A bird can be traveling at hundreds of miles per hour when it collides with an engine. If a grate were installed, the sheer force of the impact could shatter the grate, sending metal fragments into the engine. This could cause more damage than the bird itself, leading to catastrophic failure.
- Disrupting Airflow Can Stall the Engine
- Jet engines require a steady, uninterrupted flow of air to function properly. A screen or grate would create turbulence, disrupting airflow and increasing the likelihood of compressor stalls, loss of thrust, or even total engine failure.
- Increased Drag and Reduced Efficiency
- A heavy metal grate would add drag and create vibrations, reducing overall efficiency. Additionally, any restriction in the air intake would mean less air reaching the engine, decreasing performance and increasing fuel consumption—a major concern for airlines.
How Do Airlines Prevent Bird Strikes?
Since grates are not a viable solution, the aviation industry focuses on preventing bird strikes before they happen. Airports use a variety of methods, including:
- Eliminating food sources (removing plants that attract birds)
- Using sonic cannons and predator sounds to scare birds away
- Deploying laser deterrents that mimic predators
- Monitoring bird activity with radar to predict movement and reroute flights if necessary
Are Bird Strikes Really That Dangerous?
While high-profile incidents like the “Miracle on the Hudson”—when US Airways Flight 1549 struck a flock of geese and lost both engines—demonstrate the dangers of bird ingestion, most bird strikes do not cause total engine failure. Jet engines are built to withstand smaller bird strikes, and pilots are trained to handle emergencies if they occur.
However, large birds or multiple strikes can still be catastrophic. Between 1988 and 2017, more than 263 civilian aircraft worldwide were either damaged beyond repair or lost entirely due to bird strikes. In the U.S. alone, over 194,000 animal strikes were reported between 1990 and 2017.
Could a Better Solution Be Developed?
So far, no alternative protective solution has been successfully implemented. While engineers continue researching ways to improve jet engine safety, no design has been developed that effectively balances protection, efficiency, and performance.
For now, the industry accepts the calculated risk of bird strikes and relies on prevention strategies rather than installing protective grates.
What do you think—should engineers continue searching for a way to shield engines, or is the current approach the best option?
