Flying over the cuckoos nest

Take offs and landings into NAIA can be dangerous to your health. In fact it could even kill you!

Passengers have complained about flying over the Roxas Boulevard-Cavite area for 20 minutes or so due to air traffic at NAIA. What many never realized was the imminent danger they were in while taking off or hovering over the NAIA.

My accidental discovery started from a front-page story in The STAR that reported about plans of the city of Paranaque to totally ban the breeding of all types of birds, or the flying of kites within a 13-kilometer radius of the MIA.

Being a bird lover as well as frustrated kite flyer, I was naturally “alarmed” about the possibility that the whole thing might be exaggerated, so I gathered some data on the actual situation.

There is a serious problem.

In fact it is serious enough for representatives of all local airlines to meet with officials of the Manila International Airport authority or MIAA to hold the “1st Bird Incident Meeting” last June 10, 2011.

The minutes of that meeting revealed that:

“Reported bird strikes from 1996 onwards average from 20 to 30 bird strikes per annum. And based on the reports submitted, all bird strikes in NAIA . . . OCCURRED IN MID AIR DURING LANDINGS / TAKE OFFS.

In a letter addressed to MIAA General Manager Honrado, Philippine Airlines president and COO Jaime Bautista reported a bird strike sometime early May of this year which caused substantial damage to the right engine of their B777 aircraft while taking off from MIA.

In 2010, Cebu Pacific reported 5 incidents of bird strike; Cathay Pacific on the other hand had 4 bird strikes. Philippine Airlines had only one reported bird strike in the year but the hit seriously damaged two fan blades on engine no.1 of the aircraft resulting in a very expensive repair.

The report did not include bird strike incidents for smaller airlines such as Zest Air and SEAIR or private aircraft under the General Aviation section.

For the most part, the incidents have been about birds slamming into the body of aircraft particularly the wing section, windshield or nose of the aircraft where major radar and navigational equipment are located.

However, approximately 20 percent of the reported bird strikes have been about birds flying into the engine of aircraft thereby requiring costly maintenance work or extremely expensive repairs or replacement of an engine.

I certainly pity the airlines that have to spend anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions of pesos to pay for major engine repair or replacement, but what is money compared to the 200 to 300 lives that are at risk on every plane, in the event of a major bird strike?

Right now we know that bird strikes are a real threat, but when the threat becomes real, we might not even know it already happened because in air tragedies the blame is often defined as “pilot error”.

So I fully understand if the safety officers of all the airlines have expressed their concern about bird strike. I am certainly sympathetic to pilots who have expressed fear that a major air disaster may occur in the very near future.

* * *

There is indeed a serious threat to human lives posed by birds within the 13- kilometer radius. However, passing local or city ordinance does not automatically get rid of the birds.

The ban on breeding and raising domestic birds may be plausible especially if it’s done through the barangays or village officials. However, the MIAA is bound to encounter a bigger challenge in controlling migratory birds in the area because many wet spots around the MIA is full of garbage that this has created an artificial feeding ground and breeding ground for the birds.

However, what may seem like a haven for the birds will ultimately kill them due to waterborne toxins and diseases. Meantime, getting rid of the birds through natural or mechanical means will require both money and political will. 

To make matters worse, there is an emotional and political conflict between those in the aviation industry and those committed to protecting birds as well as the environment.

As the reality of an imminent aviation disaster looms on the horizon, we must all come to terms that choices have to be made. Given our current economic and cultural realities, we are stuck with the MIA as it is. Like most modern countries, we will ultimately have to follow their example of building our airports out to sea.

Where the NAIA stands, it is crowded and poses a potential danger and disturbance to people as well as birds. Imagine a large aircraft with 300 people on board being hit by a flock of birds and crashing into Paranaque, Pasay or Manila and killing several hundred more?

In the end, both the airport and the birds must be “moved”. Like Hong Kong, Japan and the “Arab states”, we can build a world-class airport on reclaimed land. As for the birds, there is enough proof “That if you build it, they will come”.

If we are to play “host” to migratory birds and seriously do our part, then we must build ideal places for our guests. Letting birds feed on trash, plastic and toxins is just as criminal as chasing them with slingshots. Hosting them in polluted and stagnant waters is the same as poisoning them.

We can create the perfect environments even within the cities if we choose to. But the choice has to be made: To do things right or not to do them at all.