Generally not. There is a story about how those are tested - firing chickens into them from a specialised gun.
Is that the story about when someone forgot to specify whether the chicken was fresh or frozen?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
(a) would love a system where if a pilot collapses (or has suicide on his/her mind) ATC could take over remotely. That COULD save lives?? An argument is remote control by ground staff is safer, as if one collapses control could be passed to someone in the next room. Or the tea-lady
(b) deflect birds into the engine??
I've heard many stories of bird strikes on the engines, the most famous probably being the ditching in the Hudson a few years back, but none of birds breaking the windscreen and incapacitating the pilots. So my suspicion is if it happens it isn't terminal for the windscreen, though it may be for the bird. The difference may be to do with the fact that the plane pushes the air in front of the windscreen out of the way, but the air in front of the engines is sucked into them.
All commercial flights other than the very smallest aircraft have to have two qualified pilots, which addresses the risk of one of them being taken ill. It should also largely address the risk of one of them deciding to take over the plane, especially if another member of crew replaces them in the cockpit if they have to leave (as didn't happen with the deliberate crash in the Alps).
Having remote control from ATC raises its own hazards, not least that of a suicidal or terrorist gaining control of the ATC console, taking over and crashing multiple aircraft.