"Gary Drescher" wrote:
Assuming the same compressibility, the forces of the two collisions
would be proportionate to the colliding objects' respective momenta.
After dropping ten feet, an object has a velocity of about 15 knots;
hence, a 1000-pound weight has a momentum of 15,000 knot-pounds. A
Canada Goose weighs up to 14 pounds; hence, at (say) 120 knots, its
momentum is at most 1,680 knot-pounds--about an order of magnitude
less than what's asserted above. If the 1000-pound weight is harder
(less compressible) than the goose, then the asserted comparison is
wrong by an even greater factor.

The goose and falling weight do, however, strike with comparable kinetic
energies:

E_goose = 0.5*14*120*120
= 100,800

E_wt = 0.5*1000*15*15
= 112,500

So maybe this is why Sport Aviation claims the strikes are comparable. If I
recall correctly, damage is roughly proportional to energy of impact, not
momentum. (Based on the theory of spring deflection, I believe: Suppose the
object (goose or large weight) strikes a compression spring. The spring
would compress to about the same amount because the spring equation,
E_spring = k_spring_constant * X_deflection, shows the linear
proportionality between energy and compression.)