Agricultural aircraft

Yates, W.E. Akesson, N.B. Coutts, H.H. Drift hazards related to ultra-low-volume and diluted sprays applied by agricultural aircraft. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Engrs., 1967, 10, 628. 

In many countries, however, the use of agricultural aircraft has significantly diminished over the last 20 years. With some, the very mention of agricultural aircraft or crop dusting (an incorrect term) spawns a reaction and fear of widespread pesticide drift. In Europe, the use of agricultural aircraft has declined rapidly over the last 20 years. The number of aircraft in the UK has been reduced from more than 100 aircraft in the mid-1970s to about a dozen today. So what are the facts, and how can application using airborne platforms be optimised ... 

Table 6.1 Some advantages of using agricultural aircraft for pesticide application...

Low flying poses significant risks for the pilots of agricultural aircraft... 

Fortunately, in comparison to the number of missions flown by agricultural aircraft, the incidence of significant drift incidents is low. It is the responsibility of all applicators to ensure that the aerial application of pesticides is optimised to avoid any off-target movement of pesticide which could have the potential to cause adverse economic impact or damage to the environment. 

Figure 6.6 Typical droplet distribution patterns obtained from the single pass of an agricultural aircraft over a test array (Droplet Technologies)...

Woods, N. (1986) Agricultural aircraft spray performance calibration for commercial operations. Crop Protection, 1986, 5(6) 417-421. 

QBE Aviation s records included a total of sixty-one (61) aerial agriculture aircraft accidents that had occirrred in the period May 2002 to October 2005. However, reliable causation information was available for only 44 of those events. Records on the other 17 accidents were limited to a basic event description and detailed claims cost information for each case. 

The changing nature of the noise intensity in agricultural aircraft makes necessary an assessment of noise dose, where the equipment performs a number of measurements of noise level and generates a projection for daily exposure. The criteria reference that supports the daily exposure corresponds to a 100% dose for an exposure time of 8 hours at the level of 85 dB(A). Furthermore, the assessment considers doubling of the dose (q = 3), in other words 88 dB(A) or 85 dB(A) -i- q is equal to the 200% of the daily exposure. 

The vibration present in the cockpit of agricultural aircrafts can come from many sources, including the mechanical systems, wind and contact with the ground. These are transmitted to the interfaces with the pilot through the aircraft structure composed typically of tubular profiles, manufactured with carbon steel. 

---