Fires

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by MarkAW

The technology is already available in the market place, roof sprinklers to draw from your swimming pool, just add a petrol/diesel pump. Its not that big a deal and neither is getting it serviced once a year. Steel mesh shutters for your windows and doors - you only hang them when a fire is in the vicinity. Use the heavy duty aluminium sarking under the roof tiles or zincalum roofs to seal the roof space and seal the eaves where the gutters join the roof.

When the big fire in Victoria occurred, I remember a guy on LS1.com.au saying his petrol powered water pump was useless because the intensity of the fire simply sucked all the oxygen out of the air around the house (and this was when the front was still 100m from his house I think he said) and the little engine simply couldn't run.

From memory he lost everything in that fire.

On the subject of controlled burns/back burning, in Wait Awhile they're usually pretty good with it but there have been 2 high profile examples of the Department of Environment stuffing them up and it got out of control, causing huge fires and property loss.

[SB076]

Should Australia, have water bombing aircraft? - I know we loan some from northern hemisphere countries from time to time and I am aware there would be a great cost to purchase some of our own. Also makes you wonder what technology is available to detect fires at a very early stage to give police a better chance of catching the culprits in the act and also giving fire crews a better chance of controlling the fires, whilst they are still relatively small.

[The Yeti]

The thing is we don't lone them we have a contract for them every season, Erricson will not sell them so like the northern hemisphere we have a contract for our fire season

We also have our own buckets and helicopters

the thing is don't think more of these arial appliances are the solution of our problem they are fantastic in smashing spot fires and this really helps stop the spread of a fire, but knocking down fire fronts and moping up can't be done this way, the other issue is fire storms and such tend to happen due to high winds, and like last week they had to be grounded

Again this is just a a conversation, I'm not even disagreeing

[mik]

Originally Posted by SB076

Should Australia, have water bombing aircraft? - I know we loan some from northern hemisphere countries from time to time and I am aware there would be a great cost to purchase some of our own. Also makes you wonder what technology is available to detect fires at a very early stage to give police a better chance of catching the culprits in the act and also giving fire crews a better chance of controlling the fires, whilst they are still relatively small.

i don't know about water bombing planes, but i have always thought being a "sunburnt country" as the poem goes, and prone to bush fires, we should have far far more fire fighting air craft of our own than what we have, surely 20 or 30 elvis heelos would be the minimum, yes it would be expensive, but cost should be of no concern when people are in danger.

just reading one of the earlier posts, did i think i read the council is allowing clearing of trees up to cleared 5 metres from the property ? this seems farcical to me, seeing some of the bush fires from victorian black saturday......... you could see flames shooting horizontally in the wind and some of the flames appeared to be like a house block long, not to mention if a 60 foot high flaming gum decides to fall over......... 5 metres clearance is not going to be all that helpfull.

Good point Yeti about the winds and air craft, i didn't think of that, it certainly would not hurt though to have a heap of these things on stand by for when the wind dies down though.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

The thing is we don't lone them we have a contract for them every season, Erricson will not sell them so like the northern hemisphere we have a contract for our fire season

We also have our own buckets and helicopters

the thing is don't think more of these arial appliances are the solution of our problem they are fantastic in smashing spot fires and this really helps stop the spread of a fire, but knocking down fire fronts and moping up can't be done this way, the other issue is fire storms and such tend to happen due to high winds, and like last week they had to be grounded

Again this is just a a conversation, I'm not even disagreeing

Agreed, fire fighting aircraft are not going to do much about large fire fronts, my thought process was trying to prevent the fronts occurring in the first place.

Can we stop people lighting fires, either deliberately or accidentally? I suggest no.

Next step, any fire that is lit how can we respond quickly and effectively to control it, before it becomes a large front. Hence the reason for fire detectors, water bombers. Granted with the large land mass we have, this this wont work all the time, but it may prevent some fires becoming large fronts.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by SB076

Agreed, fire fighting aircraft are not going to do much about large fire fronts, my thought process was trying to prevent the fronts occurring in the first place.

No No sorry I just read what I wrote back, I dont think their usless at large fires quite the oposite, they cant stop the front BUT where they are good is stoping the spots, as a bush fire starts running it does what I term gallops, it will spot forward a few hundred meters and take off while the front catches the spot and it continues like that getting morer intence as it goes

where these water bombers come in to their own is in this situation, they are reasonably acurate and can attack or atleast cool this spot fire to stop this "galloping" thus slowing the fire front up considerably

Originally Posted by SB076

Can we stop people lighting fires, either deliberately or accidentally? I suggest no.

I would love to be able to argue with this, but unfortunatly I think your right, the best we can do is educate them so the accidental ones happen less frequently

Originally Posted by SB076

Next step, any fire that is lit how can we respond quickly and effectively to control it, before it becomes a large front. Hence the reason for fire detectors, water bombers. Granted with the large land mass we have, this this wont work all the time, but it may prevent some fires becoming large fronts.

I'm not sure if you are aware but there are a number of spotting towers that are built for just this, and their location accuracy is better than most people would think, add to this our spotting aircraft and teams on the ground mean that most are caught before they become what we are seeing in the news this week.

There's another forum member viewing this thread who can no doubt explain how this side of things works much better than me so I'm hoping they contribute to this thread shortly (I won't out you, but I think you have more knowledge than me in this area, so please explain it so we can all learn)

Also please keep in mind that my old RFS brigade averaged 200 calls per year of that about 30% were to grass & bush fires, of that 30% very few end up to be jobs like this, this is because they get contained and extinguished quickly. My old RFS isn't special you would find many other brigades in the state with similar call rates, and similar call splits

[The Yeti]

A Friend just posted this on facebook, and I thought xxx000 might be interested https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...nf&app=desktop

;)

[MarkAW]

The smaller heli's carry 1 or maybe 2 cubic metres of water (up to 2T)
Elvis can carry 9.5 cubic metres (9.5T)
The 747 in the link delivers 77.6 cubic metres over a distance of 5km whilst its under flaps and slats (landing cofig)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUEqbLVfpGc

As a bushfire prone country, maybe we should spend the bucks and do the job properly. With Qantas moving maintenance off shore, surely there is a spare hanger or two at Mascot.

[ltd]

I remember over a year ago when I was in Victorville (KVCV) dropping off a retiring 438 seeing an Evergreen 747-200 with the old Pratts that was still online. I asked the duty manager what it was and he took me for a look see inside.
This thing was converted to carry around 22000 US gallons of water for firefighting. That's some 80,000 litres of water or retardant. I was impressed. It doesn't just dump the water, it has a high pressure spray system for precision bombing.
Anyways, despite the flashbacks of the cockpit with the engineers station and the old avionics, this thing had apparently been deployed recently to Israel to fight fires.
Although it had a 3 hour turnaround time, it was able to drop a continuous stream of water 100m by 5 kilometres long. Bloody impressive if you ask me.
Anyways, I've hunted around and found a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PytYPRIsJ38
Just a couple of points though, this aircraft can do water bombing at night when fires are less active, and being a 747 can fly at around 900km/h to get to anywhere in the world. This time of the year in the USA it is coming in to winter and as such this airplane just sits at KVCV waiting for work.
Would make sense to get it here, it could really make a massive difference.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by mik

That would be very upsetting for those that lost family or property, I Don't know what it is for people with enough age that should know right from wrong to light fires purposely,
when they must have some inkling people could be hurt or even worse, I can understand a bit of the fascination with fire itself for the very young, when I was a 4 year old dear old ma came out at one stage to see some newspaper in a nice little bonfire on the kitchen floor .......... she put it out not to much harm done except for burnt lino, and prior to that I had been putting lit matches into a full 20 lt drum of kerosene to see what would happen(it didn't ignite), it was used for the old kero heater, I was too young to know any better(but very curious as a lad), but a nice tanned bum saw an end to those flaming experiments.

Apparently when leaving court or where ever he was this kid was flipping off everyone and laughing. His dad was doing the same thing. Obviously his family doesn't care much about what he had done.

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by ltd

I remember over a year ago when I was in Victorville (KVCV) dropping off a retiring 438 seeing an Evergreen 747-200 with the old Pratts that was still online. I asked the duty manager what it was and he took me for a look see inside.
This thing was converted to carry around 22000 US gallons of water for firefighting. That's some 80,000 litres of water or retardant. I was impressed. It doesn't just dump the water, it has a high pressure spray system for precision bombing.
Anyways, despite the flashbacks of the cockpit with the engineers station and the old avionics, this thing had apparently been deployed recently to Israel to fight fires.
Although it had a 3 hour turnaround time, it was able to drop a continuous stream of water 100m by 5 kilometres long. Bloody impressive if you ask me.
Anyways, I've hunted around and found a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PytYPRIsJ38
Just a couple of points though, this aircraft can do water bombing at night when fires are less active, and being a 747 can fly at around 900km/h to get to anywhere in the world. This time of the year in the USA it is coming in to winter and as such this airplane just sits at KVCV waiting for work.
Would make sense to get it here, it could really make a massive difference.

What an awesome bit of gear.
Your last sentence, or rather ONE word in it, typifies our "powers that be" attitude to ideas so bloody logical..
SENSE!!
Of which it seems none of them have an ounce of!
Honestly... Wouldn't you reckon the insurance companies would maybe go halves with govco to get one (or 3) of these babies over here during our summer?
Surely it'd pay it's way by negating property fire claims?
The same could be said about Elvis... Which, by the way has been axed this summer... Pretty SENSIBLE eh??!

[MarkAW]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

The same could be said about Elvis... Which, by the way has been axed this summer... Pretty SENSIBLE eh??!

It wasn't axed up here in Sydney - it seems to be working flat out

[Brent]

Originally Posted by MarkAW

It wasn't axed up here in Sydney - it seems to be working flat out

You absolutely sure it is the same chopper? Apparently Erikson have several different models, and the controversy in Victoria is that unlike previous years where we've used the full monty 'Elvis' verson, this year Victoria has leased a smaller model. Apparently looks very similar but the water payload is a good 30-40% less.

As for larger firefighting aircraft, it starts geting a bit technical. I've seen countless pieces of footage of the Evergreen 747 supertanker, and indeed it looks a very impressive piece of kit. However, a 747 with 90,000 litres of water aboard only has a certain performance envelope that it can utilise, and potentially this can limit its low speed drop effectiveness in mountainous terrain when strong winds are blowing. It then has to return to an adequately-resourced airport facility to refill, so turnaround times become an issue.

A few years ago the Victorian CFA trialled a DC-10 supertanker, but (fortunately) we had a mild summer that year and the thing barely got used. Its effectiveness in local conditions was thus largely untested.

If you're looking for flexible, quick turnaround, precision waterbombing for asset protection purposes, the Skycranes run a pretty solid argument.

[Yellow_Festiva]

What was the other one? Georgia Peach??

The plane must cost a whole heap to hire and run, I wonder how it compares to 2 or 3 heli tankers?

[Nikked]

Also, a plane needs filling from a tanker or hydrant...helicopter can scoop up from lakes/dams.

The most successful fixed-wing bombing craft are amphibious craft, where they can take in water whilst skimming a body of water. But where they are used in America, there is the luxury of huge lakes...

[Brent]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Also, a plane needs filling from a tanker or hydrant...helicopter can scoop up from lakes/dams.

The most successful fixed-wing bombing craft are amphibious craft, where they can take in water whilst skimming a body of water. But where they are used in America, there is the luxury of huge lakes...

Spot on. Fixed wings work really well in Northern America where large lakes allow 'skimming' via a snorkel which enables the refilling process to be done without landing. As you say, we don't have this luxury here in Aus.

If you consider that a DC-10 or a 747 supertanker would most likely have to use a major city airport to land, re-fill, and then take off, it limits the options somewhat. And that assumes a clear inbound and outbound air traffic control priority to land and take off again ahead of all the other 'commercial' flights. Can just imagine a small town burning to the ground whilst a 747 supertanker stays in a holding pattern whilst 3 Jetstar planeloads of bogans back from Bali take priority spot on the landing grid at Tullamarine or Sydney airports.....

[usernametaken]

The initial DC evaluation testing in Wombat State Forest from a few years ago.

I guess it's ok to post now.

Nothing too exciting here though..


http://s47.photobucket.com/user/kako...ef5ff.mp4.html


And then in Enfield later on...

http://youtu.be/YtiIX9lax-s

The results weren't that spectacular in heavy forests

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

Don't over think it, fire needs 3 main things Heat, Oxygen and Fuel if you take one of these 3 out you have no fire

your numbers are wrong mate, it's 4 things, not 3

well we didn't have the 'mega fire' (surprised he kept a straight face as he used that term) Shane Fitzy said we might face and no '300 km wide fire front' happened.

most firebugs were probably scared off by the obvious attention they'd be under

I was waiting for Channel 9 to have the all too familiar 'telethon for the bushfire victims' but since there was no 'mega fire', probably no telethon either

the message from this is Report Fire Starters

[mac_man_luke]

I heard a month or so ago Australia was offered a 747 tanker but refused it.

[Peter B - CV8]

News Flash !! A fixed wing fire fighting aircraft has gone down in the Ulladulla area (sketchy details at this stage - but a wing snapped off in flight). Hope all are well - but doesn't sound too good...

[SB076]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...aircraft-crash

Not good

[Yellow_Festiva]

No good. Wing snapped off? I'm sure I've seen a clip if this same thing happening in another country.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by xxx000

your numbers are wrong mate, it's 4 things, not 3

well we didn't have the 'mega fire' (surprised he kept a straight face as he used that term) Shane Fitzy said we might face and no '300 km wide fire front' happened.

most firebugs were probably scared off by the obvious attention they'd be under

I was waiting for Channel 9 to have the all too familiar 'telethon for the bushfire victims' but since there was no 'mega fire', probably no telethon either

the message from this is Report Fire Starters

Your apprently the expert so you take over

for those out there old mate here is refering to the 4th item which is essentialy the chemical reactiaction that casues the combustion



I really didn't think I needed to mention it in my post as well I was trying to keep it simple and it had no place in what I was trying to explain

I suspect xxx000 has a real issue with the RFS & Fire Rescue NSW (this I worked out by his smart **** Report Fire Starters comment

I've seen very little by way of anything from this fool aside from miniscule corrections in my posts and 5hit caning of the fire services, because he seems to think they're doing a bad job

he's entitled to his opinion, even if it is messed up

[Streets]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

No good. Wing snapped off? I'm sure I've seen a clip if this same thing happening in another country.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A4QZAxrb28

[LG17]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

Your apprently the expert so you take over

for those out there old mate here is refering to the 4th item which is essentialy the chemical reactiaction that casues the combustion

image

I really didn't think I needed to mention it in my post as well I was trying to keep it simple and it had no place in what I was trying to explain

I suspect xxx000 has a real issue with the RFS & Fire Rescue NSW (this I worked out by his smart **** Report Fire Starters comment

I've seen very little by way of anything from this fool aside from miniscule corrections in my posts and 5hit caning of the fire services, because he seems to think they're doing a bad job

he's entitled to his opinion, even if it is messed up

I find that if you ignore those kinds of posts, they usually disappear 'cause they're not getting the attention they crave

[wrongwaynorris]

[QUOTE=Brent;4916595]You absolutely sure it is the same chopper? Apparently Erikson have several different models, and the controversy in Victoria is that unlike previous years where we've used the full monty 'Elvis' verson, this year Victoria has leased a smaller model. Apparently looks very similar but the water payload is a good 30-40% less.

Your talking about the CH 54 based one unlike Elvis which is CH 64 ( Jolly Green Giant ) based .

[wrongwaynorris]

Originally Posted by xxx000

your numbers are wrong mate, it's 4 things, not 3

well we didn't have the 'mega fire' (surprised he kept a straight face as he used that term) Shane Fitzy said we might face and no '300 km wide fire front' happened.

most firebugs were probably scared off by the obvious attention they'd be under

I was waiting for Channel 9 to have the all too familiar 'telethon for the bushfire victims' but since there was no 'mega fire', probably no telethon either

the message from this is Report Fire Starters

Are you as big a waynker as you appear by your posts ? Did the RFS knock you back as being too mentally unstable or something ?

[MarkAW]

Originally Posted by Brent

You absolutely sure it is the same chopper? Apparently Erikson have several different models, and the controversy in Victoria is that unlike previous years where we've used the full monty 'Elvis' verson, this year Victoria has leased a smaller model. Apparently looks very similar but the water payload is a good 30-40% less.

As for larger firefighting aircraft, it starts geting a bit technical. I've seen countless pieces of footage of the Evergreen 747 supertanker, and indeed it looks a very impressive piece of kit. However, a 747 with 90,000 litres of water aboard only has a certain performance envelope that it can utilise, and potentially this can limit its low speed drop effectiveness in mountainous terrain when strong winds are blowing. It then has to return to an adequately-resourced airport facility to refill, so turnaround times become an issue.

I can't definively tell if its the same chopper as all I'm seeing is about 3 secs of vision at a time on media infills - but it doesn't seem quite the same size as previous years so you could be right - hmmm ripped off again with product getting smaller - they've done it with waggon wheels and cherry ripes, beer and now choppers

From an armchair perspective if the Errickson carries 10 tonne per drop and the 747 carries 80 tonne per drop (and this can be more effective as a suppressant than plain tap water), even though there is a 3hr turn around for loading fuel & water/suppressant plus the travel time to and from the fire (lets assume 2 hours) for a total of 5 hours per circuit; Would the Errickson normally drop 8 loads onto the fire front for the same time period?

Additionally the 747 can also drop at night where as rotary wings can't.

I know I'm going on a bit about this but Australia is the home of bushfires and our are bigger and badder than any other country. Our polititions will **** us over by making all sorts of statements during the crisis then reduce the budgets of the fire services after all the hue and cry has died down with stupid nonsense like "the fire has burnt everything - nothing to do here".

I'm sick of stupid pollies, I'm sick of stupid councils and greenies and I'm sick of bushfires that could of been prevented or at least managed in the early stages.

[MarkAW]

[QUOTE=wrongwaynorris;4916988]

Originally Posted by Brent

You absolutely sure it is the same chopper? Apparently Erikson have several different models, and the controversy in Victoria is that unlike previous years where we've used the full monty 'Elvis' verson, this year Victoria has leased a smaller model. Apparently looks very similar but the water payload is a good 30-40% less.

Your talking about the CH 54 based one unlike Elvis which is CH 64 ( Jolly Green Giant ) based .

I'm might have this wrong but;

A CH 64 is a Chinook - twin rotor (2 big rotors about the same size) with a fully enclosed body.

An S 64 is a Sikorsky Skycrane, the civillian version of the military type CH54 Sikorsky Tarhe which has long since retired.

The original jolly green giant was a Sikorsky HRS-2

[wrongwaynorris]

[QUOTE=MarkAW;4917007]

Originally Posted by wrongwaynorris

I'm might have this wrong but;

A CH 64 is a Chinook - twin rotor (2 big rotors about the same size) with a fully enclosed body.

An S 64 is a Sikorsky Skycrane, the civillian version of the military type CH54 Sikorsky Tarhe which has long since retired.

The original jolly green giant was a Sikorsky HRS-2

Sorry yes you are right .