The Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) is facing growing criticism over its inability to address the persistent problem of bird strikes, despite commissioning new hazard control equipment five months ago. Bird strikes, or collisions between birds and aircraft, remain a significant safety risk for airlines operating in Nigeria, leading to flight disruptions and costly damages to aircraft engines.
In October 2024, FAAN unveiled a new set of equipment aimed at tackling bird strikes at Murtala Muhammed International Airport (MMA) in Lagos. The event was attended by Olubunmi Kuku, FAAN’s Managing Director, who was represented by Abdullahi Mohmood, Director of Airport Operations. Kuku had assured the public that the equipment would provide a permanent solution to the issue. According to him, these devices would be distributed to airports across Nigeria, with the aim of reducing the danger posed by birds to aircraft. However, five months later, the problem of bird strikes persists, and airlines continue to suffer the consequences.
One of Nigeria’s largest airlines, Air Peace, recently experienced significant disruptions due to bird strikes. In the space of just 24 hours, the airline had three of its planes affected by bird collisions. Allen Onyema, the Chairman and CEO of Air Peace, expressed frustration over the ongoing issue, which he described as a serious menace. Onyema revealed that the airline recorded a total of 43 bird strikes in 2024 alone, causing substantial costs in engine repairs and replacements. He called for more effective solutions to tackle the problem.
The Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) has also reported that the number of bird strikes in 2025 has continued to rise, signaling that the issue is far from being resolved. Industry experts have raised concerns over FAAN’s failure to resolve the problem, given the challenges it has faced for over two decades.
John Ojikutu, a respected aviation expert and CEO of Centurion Aviation Security and Safety Consult, expressed surprise that bird strikes are still a significant issue at Murtala Muhammed International Airport, especially after the challenges faced in the past. Ojikutu recalled the situation 20 years ago when two ornithologists—experts on bird life—were brought in to tackle the problem. However, despite their efforts, the issue was never fully resolved.
Ojikutu suggested that one potential solution could involve airport operators providing compensation to airlines for bird strikes that occur at their airports. He argued that this could serve as a way to hold airport authorities accountable and encourage them to take bird strike control more seriously. Ojikutu also emphasized that addressing bird strikes should be a key part of the checklist for airport certification, to ensure that airports meet international safety standards.
Samuel Caulcrick, a former rector of the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT) in Zaria, proposed that drones could be used to address the bird strike issue, particularly on takeoff paths and approach areas. Caulcrick suggested that the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) or FAAN could be given approval to use drones as a temporary measure while awaiting the regulatory framework for drone use. He noted that the use of drones to deter birds is a growing practice worldwide, with several airports and aviation authorities already exploring the idea.
While Caulcrick’s suggestion received little attention in Nigeria, the use of drones for bird control is gaining traction in other parts of the world. Drones can be equipped with various deterrents, such as visual or auditory devices, to scare birds away from airport runways and flight paths. These drones could be a cost-effective and environmentally friendly solution to the ongoing bird strike problem.
Alex Nwuba, President of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Nigeria and former CEO of Associated Airlines, also weighed in on the issue. Nwuba stressed that effective bird control requires a combination of methods, including sound, visual deterrents, and structural barriers that make airports less attractive to birds. He agreed with the suggestion of using drones, noting that birds are often curious about drones, making them an effective tool for bird control.
Nwuba also pointed out that there is no single method that can completely eliminate bird strikes. Instead, a variety of techniques must be used together to reduce the risk of bird collisions. Among the methods that have been suggested are propane cannons, bio-acoustic devices, fire explosions, acoustic scaring devices, and shell crackers. These techniques create loud noises or sudden movements that scare birds away from airport areas.
The ongoing problem of bird strikes is not just a nuisance for airlines, but also a serious safety concern. A bird strike can cause significant damage to an aircraft’s engines, landing gear, or other critical components, potentially putting passengers’ lives at risk. The costs of repairing or replacing damaged parts can run into millions of dollars, placing a heavy financial burden on airlines, especially in a time when the aviation industry is already grappling with various challenges. The failure of FAAN’s new hazard control equipment to address the bird strike issue raises questions about the authority’s commitment to aviation safety and the effectiveness of the measures it has implemented.
