Fire Bombers

[ramble on]

There are CL415 Water Bombers sitting on the ground in the winter off-season all over southern Europe right now.

Why on earth cant our government arrange an exchange of hemispheres for these aircraft with the seasons?

Alternatively in RAAF or RAN service or equally in Surveillance and Rescue.

Yes, I know that it was attempted some years ago for profit, but lets forget about that and look at the real costs of the few recent bushfire seasons and things possibly getting hotter and drier?

43 Grupo 2012 - YouTube

[fujii]

It's not the profit angle, it's the lack of suitable areas to pick up water in Australia. Not many lakes in the Blue Mountains or anywhere in the Great Dividing Range where many fires are.

[neville_nobody]

Not many lakes in the Blue Mountains or anywhere in the Great Dividing Range where many fires are.


Warragamba Dam and the Pacifc Ocean don't count? Or is saltwater a non starter?

[BPA]

Not to mention the lakes on the central coast, which in WWII had flying boats operating off them.

[601]

it's the lack of suitable areas to pick up water in Australia.

Canadair did a study on this back in the 80s.
See this post.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/526179-firefighting-plane-down-nsw.html#post8116228

[Ken Borough]

Approx 5nm SW of Lithgow is Lake Lyall. I don't know if it and the surrounding terrain would allow aviation fire-fighting but I'd be quite confident that the relevant authorities would have had it examined.

[ramble on]

I didnt realise that there were others talking about this very topic on the other firefighting thread. Others had picked up on this before I and have made very good points there.

I only opened this thread because I passed through a European airport the other day and saw 6 CL415s sitting idle on the ground while NSW was engulfed in flames with no respite in sight.

I thought it is yet another national embarrassment (along the lines of my pet grievances of everything is for profit in Australia, public infrastructure in private or banks hands and the banal beauracracy of aviation that is driving us to the wall) that we had nothing similar given the environment we live in and the future direction of weather problems.

A lack of suitable water bodies with respect is a red herring - these aircraft are amphibious and could eaily be refilled still reasonable quickly on the ground by water tankers which are cleverly deployed.

What is lacking is the fortitude and strength of leadership in our country.

We need a strong purpose built aircraft, not some old hacks that put people at unfair risk.

C130 Crash - YouTube

It should not be a question of operation for profit, and there should be no question of CASA placing banal beauracratic hurdles or reinventing the wheel.

It should be a case of: Others do it successfully, lets make it happen here too for the benefit of the people.

[falconx]

Forget they're float planes. Plenty of airstrips and tankers to fill them up...

[N707ZS]

Quite a number of civil Spanish firebombers go to Chile in the winter the rest just go for maintenance and storage.

[Rwy in Sight]

I would check it over the next weekend, but I am fairly sure that Greek CL (both 215 & 415) are down for maintenance during winter months.

And I also thing about the issues about terrain familiarity and for the CL-215 I doubt they can do the trip without some heavy maintenance in the middle of it.


Rwy in Sight

[PLovett]

Well then, what about a couple of these based, say at Richmond or Canberra, where they could do the whole of the J Curve in a couple of hours.


Boeing 747 Water Bomber - YouTube



Its about time they got serious about fire fighting and aviation in Australia

[TBM-Legend]

A friend of mine drives CL215's and they've ferried them from Canada to Turkey and back. There is a conversion of the CL215 to CL215T replacing the radials with turbines.

Typical here however, the emergency will be over and the pollies/bureaucrats all go back to sleep until the next one.

[Keg]

it's the lack of suitable areas to pick up water in Australia. Not many lakes in the Blue Mountains or anywhere in the Great Dividing Range where many fires are.

If you have a look at the places recently where we've had significant loss of property and/or life, there has always been water relatively close by- close enough for a CL type option to be quite viable. Lake Eildon wasn't that far from the Victorian bush fires, Warragamba for the Blue Mountains fires, lots of lakes for the central coast fires, Lake Burley Griffin for the Canberra fires although there may be a question there over depth?

Even if they take 30 minutes to do a round trip from the fire front to the water supply, the amount of water they can put on the fire is enough to alter fire behaviour. In many cases they will alter fire behaviour more in one drop than a helicopter will flying multiple smaller drops but with more water over the same time frame.

When you then have 2-3 (or more) of these things working in concert, it can be a very significant force multiplier.

[Old Akro]

Evergreen don't say anything about filling the 747, but it seems to imply that it fills on the runway. The requirement for a 2500m runway is slightly restrictive, but with a 747 cruise speed it should be feasible to run out of capital city or military airports. They say it holds 78,000 litres. I think that might be equivalent to 23 Dromader flights. I can imagine the logistics of filling rapidly might be complex. That might be 3 semi-trailer tankers on the ground and they seem to add retardant chemicals.

On the other hand, it can basically get here from the US overnight.

[TBM-Legend]

bigger/heavier aircraft can more easily operate in higher wind conditions. The Firecats [modified S-2] and older B-26's etc had better crosswind limits for a start when AT's are effectively grounded.

I guess what works is a combo of heavy and lighter fixed and rotary wing machines. The mindset in OZ is one or the other....reality is both!

[Neville Nobody]

The Firecats [modified S-2] and older B-26's etc had better crosswind limits for a start when AT's are effectively grounded.


AT's were working last week in 50 knots plus, load is similar with both old twins mentioned to an 802.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Re RAAF participation in the recent bushfire problem - this is the RAAF magazine 'Airforce', article....

Defence Newspapers | Air Force (http://airforcenews.realviewdigital.com/#folio=2)

Cheers:ok:

[Howard Hughes]

AT's were working last week in 50 knots plus50 knots crosswind? :eek:

[Trojan1981]

Meanwhile, we retired 16 S-2s in the 1980's and left them to rot. Now they've been purchased by a foreign company for, I am led to believe, conversion to Firecats... aren't we such a smart country..?

Now, cue all the vested-intrest operators and blinkered senior fire staff telling us why they can single handedly save the world with a bunch of Air Tractors :rolleyes:

[Neville Nobody]

Vested interest? You are looking at least 3 million per aircraft for conversion without any work on airframe corrosion/AD updates. Have you seen the Trackers in the last couple of years? They are being sold for scrap not as going aircraft. A Firecat has a similar load to 802's, can't operate on anything apart from tar runways and has well over twice the operating cost. Trojan, you going to donate the 20 or 25 million required to convert and get airworthy half a dozen aircraft?

[alphacentauri]

Neville,

Those aircranes (only 3 of them) cost; (these figures are 5 years old and where quoted to me by one of the crew)

10,000 per day each just to be in oz
10,000 per hr if they go flying.

They are here for about 100-150 days/yr that works out to be 150 *30000 = 4.5mil per season just to be in Oz....if they go flying its more.

Now add the operating costs of all the jetrangers/airtractors and anything else that can carry water and the cost you quote to convert the trackers would only amount to about the total one season fire fighting cost...not that much really.

They have been here every season for at least a decade...thats about 45mil spent so far...just on 3 helicopters...

I know 20-25 mil sounds like a lot....but if it gets 8-10 aircraft going of that capacity it probably isn't wasted money.

What needs to be considered is cost vs benefit. I really don't know how effective they would be. They seem to be effective overseas in similar environments, so I am of the opinion it would not be money wasted. I am not an expert of fixed wing firebombing.

I am just trying to say that the money argument for not doing it, is kind of void if you compare it to how much money we are already spending figting fires....but they have to be effective.

This assumes the Trackers are also capable of being made airworthy. Something I suspect they are not.....they have been sitting there for an awfully long time.

Alpha

[Neville Nobody]

Different missions for Aircranes and fixed wing, both have strong points. It's not an either or, there are uses for both.
As for those prices, I've heard just over double that for Crane hire.

[Trojan1981]

The 802 is a capable machine for sure, though lacking in performance and very strip hungry when that tank is full, not something that would have been a problem in the Firecat (which can operate from gravel strips btw). Also, many operators are bringing 602s and Droms, not 802s.

The Trackers were also owned by the govt until 1994. The air and ground crews were in government employ until the mid eighties and there was a significant stock of spares. They are all very low time airframes and could have quite easily been converted for fire-fighting work back then (before the 802 even existed).

I wonder what the total cost of bushfire has been since then? It would be in the tens of billions, and the cost of conversion of a fleet of dedicated bombers (with further assistance provided by smaller operators) would pale into insignificance.

As an aside, most of the helicopters are actually cheaper than the rates I have seen here. The ADF has a stupid way of costing it's assets, that sees a Black Hawk costed at around $27k per hour for example. But most medium water bombing helicopters (Bell 214, Dauphin and UH-1 for example) are $5-6k per hour to the tasking authority. If a fire is near a water source or on the coast (whether urban area or not) the rate of wet stuff on hot stuff can be much higher using these machines than in any fixed wing. I'd bet it's probably even better (for a given cost) than you'd get using the Evergreen 747!

[Wunwing]

Neville N.
Yes I have seen them in the last couple of years.Have you?
Two of us did a survey for a potential purchaser about 2 or 3 years ago. All but 1 have been hangared for a number of years.There may be reasons for not converting them but I doubt if corrosion (except for the one in the open) is a factor.

Whatever was the case for the Trackers, the current light aircraft, helicopters and red trucks is not working.As I said on another thread on this subject, I was at Springwood when the fire broke out. There was about a 2 hour window to stop it. It is now history that the current system didn't stop it. So do we do the usual and say, well we were all very brave and pat everyone on the back or do we look at a better way?

And we can look at the real picture, not the fuzzy furry one and admit that this inaction did cost lives as well as terrible property loss. In the complex that my parents live in, 4 persons died during and immediately after their evacuation. Yes they were elderly but if they had died as a result of a medical procedure there would have been an investigation.There were 3 other hospices and hostels also evacuated in Springwood. I wonder how many more died and are being quietly swept under the carpet while no one does anything about a better system? As previously mentioned in this and other threads on this subject there are too many entrenched interests.

Wunwing

[Neville Nobody]

Yes Wunwing I have seen them and it was around the time you did. I have read people seem to think that ITAR's limit the Trackers to scrap.

Armchair experts abound, every one has an answer.
Despite what you say there is a limit to what Governments/Organisations have to spend.

As far as particular fire events every one is individual, the people tasked (Paid or volunteer) to fight fires do so to the very best of their ability.
There are weather events that when occur influence fires in such a way that we are just observers.

[Trojan1981]

Wunwing I agree with you.

Neville,
The government has had more than enough cash to make this happen. Significant savings can be realized simply by more efficient use of assets. I'm not sure who you're referring to with the armchair experts comment, but it's a clear miss in this case. I am a volunteer firefighter (and previously SES for 12 years), former bushfire pilot and a former military and civilian Aircrewman. I have no axe to grind. I do however believe the current system, while a vast improvement on previous years, is not working.

The government needs to step up its commitment to prevention and combat of bushfire and natural disasters more generally. The ADF has the equipment to conduct water bombing operations, but has not trained with it for years. The 'operational commitments' argument doesn't hold water, because large parts of the organization do very little of operational value and the return for the number of assets and logistic support base is very low.

In my opinion, in a nation that is so prone to natural disasters, and with such vast distances to cover, a dedicated fleet is required to meet our response obligations. Not only that, but we should be leading the world in the development of new techniques and technology. While the individuals involved in emergency response to an amazing job, at the moment we are letting them, and the wider public down.

[Neville Nobody]

Trojan
former bushfire pilot and a former military and civilian Aircrewman
So did you fly radial or turbine Droms or were you in 802's? What do you think of the Victorian tasking and use of assets compared to other states like WA and SA? Did you notice much difference between NSW and Vic ops?

[Trojan1981]

I'm not an ag pilot. My bushfire aviation experience is rotary (crewman) and fixed-wing spotters/birdogs (pilot). Many of my current and former colleagues are fixed and rotary wing ag/bomber pilots and crewmen. Vollie work is in addition to the above. Many others are very senior emergency management staff in the NSW and WA combat agencies. I've also been responsible for providing aviation emergency response assets to government, though for contractual reasons Im not going to elaborate on that.

Like I said, no axe to grind. The people who formulate the actions plans for these operations are not pilots, the 'experts' they often consult are usually not pilots. Some of the senior EM staff in NSW RFS are not even firefighters!

What about yourself, what's your angle? I take it you are an ag pilot?

[Neville Nobody]

I have a good friend who is

[Wunwing]

Last night I went looking for what happened to the now defunct Aero Union fleet of P3 Orion, fire bombers.The answer is that they have been purchased by an aircraft wrecking company.

I also came across a 2012 article about the Canadian company, Airspray, who have a fleet of L188 fire bombers using the old Aero Union facility to convert a Bae 146 aircraft to a fire bomber. In the article the Airspray rep stated that they were looking for contract work in the southern hemisphere for the next season (2013?)for the Bae aircraft.

Looks like they didn't sell their product or someone here ignored their offer?

Anyone know what happened to the Hookway,Sale Trackers?

Wunwing

[Trojan1981]

That's very interesting wunwing. As you probably already know, the 146 can operate from relatively short, unpaved airstrips and is remarkably easy to support (although getting on a bit). I wonder if the option was ever investigated?

[Neville Nobody]

Have the Trackers been sold?

[Wunwing]

The Bae 146 is the newest of the converted fire bombers. Years younger than the CV580s, Trackers, Neptunes and the L188s which make up the majority of the worlds non amphibian large aircraft fire fleet.

Maybe this is the way we should go? There is certainly enough operations and engineering know how here for the aircraft type.

Wunwing

[Engineer_aus]

A ) large fire = arm chair aviation/fire experts come out
B ) Arm chair experts with many years of aviation fire fighting experience always talk about these large planes.....

I am sorry but big does not mean that they are going to work here in Australia.
There is also an issue with Incident controllers not calling in resources quick enough to stop a fire. QLD,SA,WA never seem to have huge fires in their metro areas. Only VIC/NSW/ACT appear to. So what are those states doing well?

The trackers have been sold to a company in the states. I have been lead to believe that it is for parts only. (I am happy to be corrected)

[currawong]

Agree.

The equipment here is well suited, indeed purpose built for the task in many/most cases.

How it is deployed...:hmm:


PS declare I have no vested interest in the matter

[Wunwing]

I assume that I am by your definition an 'armchair expert" and I'll wear that but in the case of the Springwood fire I was at the scene minutes after it started. What I saw was a small fire turn into a big one and a scene of vehicle gridlock and complete chaos along the one road in and out of Winmalee.

I don't claim to know much about bushfires but I do know a bit about aircraft and flying. Given the typical scenario of gridlock it seems to me the best way to deliver a big fire knockdown is aviation based and I dont mean a few small helos with buckets.I mean something that can deliver 20 tons at one go followed by rapid similar drops.

I was having a meal last night with a very experienced Blue Mountains fire fighter and he brought up this subject. He played down our Springwood experience but agreed the Lithgow fire would have been well served by a large water drop.I suspect if he had seen what we saw he may have a different view on Springwood as well.

Again I say if what we are currently doing is so successful, why did we have this series of recent disasters. The Springwood damage bill alone would pay for years of running 3 or 4 heavy fire bombers.I dont understand why big seems to work in the rest of the world but we are different.

I've seen the fires in California and that was definitely deep valleys and eucalypts.Why are we different, maybe the Coriolis effect?

Wunwing

[currawong]

Because the equipment is deployed too little, too late.

[601]

Because the equipment is deployed too little, too late.

And because the equipment itself is too little

[grug]

Once again we come across the seed of the issue. Initial attack. Hit it hard, hit it early.
Its always easier to put out a small fire than to fight an inferno for weeks on end.
Who cares if the responce to a new / small fire is heavy handed or over gunned.

The savings are to be made in the what could have been scenarios.
Opportunity is what allows a small fire to get out of hand.

[currawong]

Agreed.

Too little, too late, often not for days at a time.

If the equipment here is so inadequate, why are elements of it rotated to the northern hemisphere for their fire season?

Why are the aircraft held back till conditions exist where nothing is effective?

The aircraft should be deployed when/where they will do the most good...

[Wunwing]

currawong

I suspect that reason equipment is rotated to/from the northern hemisphere is because its good equipment but when it is used there it is part of a fleet of much larger equipment in physical size, aircaft mix and fleet size.

1 helo and a bucket was useless on the initail attack at Springwood. 50 helos may have been better. 4 or 5 CV580s/L188s or Bae146s may have stopped it when it was just a grass fire.

The Lithgow fire had no initial attack as it was in an explosive danger area. 4 or 5 CV580s/L188s/Bae146s may have stopped it in its tracks too.

I said in an earlier thread I had a long conversationm about this subject only a few weeks ago with a very senior RFS person. His is excuse for not using large aircraft was very clear, lack of water. In all the recent fire disasters around Sydney, Newcastle and the Highlands there were plenty of sources of water so his excuse "doesn't hold water".Maybe that is part of the problem that the RFS has a one size fits all aproach?

Wunwing

[Horatio Leafblower]

I am only a casual observer but the 802s based here never seem to move until it's 30+ deg C, blowing 30 knots, and there is a plume of smoke into the FLs.

More than one SEAT pilot has commented to me that it would make more sense to have a crack first thing in the morning before everything turns to sh:mad:t and it's like pissing on a blast furnace. :ugh:

Its OK - the guys at the SAD know what they're doing. :bored:

[currawong]

I agree Wunwing. One helo and bucket is not an initial attack.

More of a token gesture.

Horatio has it right.

[grug]

All these elements that have been mentioned by horatio and currawong are exactly the point. These same problems of, lack of inital attack, adequate response size and working the fire at times when the conditions are in your favour. (ie crack of dawn the cool mornings when the humidity is at its best and the wind still at its lowest..) Are spread right across this country.

But no mater what state you are in, proposals to take the fight to the fire in such a manner at that time of the day are definately off the table.

We all know that the boys from the state air desk frequently pick through pprune looking for the little tidbits and gossip that inevitably pop up. Can you blame them really, locked up in an office all day, I'd do the same.

What I am getting to is, would it not be good to hear from some of these guys. The ones who fire the shots, book the planes, make the decisions, form the tactics. Just to hear from them to maby explain some of their decision processes, or considerations or even their thoughts on the current air attack policies. Maby even let us know where it is that these ideas of aerial attack are going wrong.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Zero chance of a public servant doing that, much less from someone involved in something as dramatic, emotive and "heroic" as fighting bushfires. From Homebush.

[PhilKenSebben]

I couldn't help but chime in here about the tactics for SA.

The other day here in Adelaide it was around 23, hardly 'severe bushfire' conditions. Sitting watching the CFS paging feed I noticed a small fire break out in scrub-land up north, and not even after 30 minutes they had already tasked 2 AT's and a rotary. Not even 20 minutes later they had already called them off as the threat had been mitigated, not a single drop of water bombed (to the best of my knowledge). Seems like hitting hard and hitting early is the approach they are taking over here, seems to be working as well!

[T28D]

One helo and bucket is not an initial attack

It just raises the local humidity for 180 seconds

[grug]

Philkensebben, I have read about that kind of a responce being issued in sa many years ago, I thought it no longer occurred.

There is an article on the web somewhere, written a few years I'm unsure of its name and location. ( title is something like "flying in formation").
Written by someone in the sa cfa or rural fire department, about air attack in the mount lofty ranges, It outlined how effective initial air attack was , to the point of senior cfa members complaining that junior ground crew were not getting enough experience in fighting big fires. Due to the fires being suppressed from the start by air attack.

May sound like a load of crap to some.

But I bet someone out there knows where this document is.

[Engineer_aus]

Check out all the aviation/bombing stuff on this site
The Research | Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre (http://www.bushfirecrc.com/)

This mob also
Welcome to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) | CSIRO (http://www.csiro.au/)

The RFS air support needs to be signed off by various people. It is a joke at that. Also the local managers want it to become a section 44 for O/T, and also the money comes out of the state coffer and not their own local coffer. (I am in the RFS so I am well aware of what goes on)

Look at WA with their zone 2 response. Irrespective of the type of call there is a automatic 3 station turn out plus helicopters. SA are the same, but different set up. Hit it hard early and go home.

So please Armchair experts please keep dribbling from your armchairs. It is very interesting to read your dribble.:D

[Neville Nobody]

For those who say the current fleet doesn't have enough capacity. There is a trend to operate fixed wing aircraft in a group. From pairs up to six or more. So minimum would be 6,000 litres up to 18,000 with six aircraft, all within a minute.

[grug]

after a bit of digging.

http://airtanker.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Flying-in-Formation.pdf

second page, first and second paragraphs are about what i was referencing previous.

for Engineer_aus good to hear from someone on the RFS team who appears to have some of the same ideas of what we are all dribbling about.

just for clarification, "the local managers want it to become a section 44 for O/T" what does that mean? and how will that change things if it goes that way?

[Horatio Leafblower]

Section 44 is the Panic Button - it means they basically have a blank cheque, and is all funded by the Govt directly.

This means that Overtime payments don't drain the RFS funds.

I think they call this "The Tail wagging the dog"

[OpsNormal]

Horatio, most of the big(ger) implement decisions (for the fires surrounding Sydney anyway) were being made from Round Corner Dural upstairs HQ during the thick of the melee a few weeks ago. This from an involved family member...

I did put a (now lost - thanks to my 3.5 year old sitting on my lap while I was editting it) post up yesterday about some of the issues recently raised within the RFS, however there will always be those who think they know better than those paid to do it.

A couple of NSW based facts that may well not sit well with some:

* Phil Koperberg was the main proponent of ground based initial attack using a large number of bods to surround, cut and burn breaks and contain the fire. For this reason dumping upwards of 60 tonnes of water in one place above the heads of a large number of ground based personnel is not a smart way of preserving their lives, limbs or general health and well being. This mindset of using bods right at the fire front still pervades to this day. You have to change that and show them a better way.

* The cooler part of the day is the better time to get your ground bods on the job cutting breaks, back burning, actually fighting the fire etc and those moaning about being able to get into it early in the day with an aeroplane at that time would you like a cup of cement for the reasons listed above?

Neville (and all of the guru's out there fighting these fires) "love yer werk".

The issue isn't capacity per se, just the ability to direct one heck of a lot of water in one direction very quickly. Do you think it would be an even better idea to use the machinery we currently utilise to follow in behind a larger asset to stomp on the spots and crowns the big boy missed and then get back into the primary role while big boy is off getting topped-up again? I do....:ok:

[grug]

those moaning about being able to get into it early in the day with an aeroplane at that time would you like a cup of cement for the reasons listed above?


That's a bit harsh, and ill try not moan but i'll pass on the cup on cement as I think we should not forget the pilot recently lost due to a wing failure in the mid day turbulence.

[Trojan1981]

Neville, the six in a group attack is actually pretty rare. It does happen, often in an initial attack, but once they get into the rotation of landing, filling, fueling etc. the rate really slows down and from the second run they are operating individually.

For all the 'armchair experts' comments floating around, it might be news to many here that it's actually many of the swivel chair chinless wonders in state and regional ops centers who are the real REMFs here. Many of the emergency management personnel have NEVER been firies, yet now wear the uniform and call the shots as 'experts'. Many (like PK) are there to further their own political/public service ambitions.

Those talking about SA and WA; I can't comment on SA, but in WA I have seen fires very quickly race out of control because they were not attacked quickly enough. During the 2011-12 season a burn off went so awry you could see the results from space. The same problem there was lack of assets. In one fire, close to Bunbury, JT, BUN and Bussleton bombers were able to keep up a good rate of application by filling and fueling at BUN. They, along with the ground based firies, soon had it knocked down. Same situation, but this time in Margs, stretched resources a little to far, and they found that the rate with the same assets was much lower, and the result disastrous.

[growahead]

Does anyone else think that CL415's may have helped in the recent Stradbroke Is fires? I'd guess that reloading wouldn't have been too much of a problem. I think we will eventually get these aircraft or similar. It's only a matter of time until we have a major fire in a large centre. If I was a guessing person, I'd say Hobart would be a prime candidate. A serious fire out of control on Mt Wellington would be impossible to stop without some serious hardware. Plenty of water available down there. Unfortunately, it looks like it will take a disaster to prompt a serious investment in protecting out population.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

I have been listening a lot to Bill Gammage. He has a book "The Greatest Estate on Earth- How Aborigines Made Australia"

Provocative thought for the greenies to allow mosaic and template burns in the nation's forests. Planned locally, nationally beneficial. Someone already has posted around here that more thought needs investing in numerous and regular planned fuel reduction burns to eliminate the scrubby middle storie in our bushland. Makes you wonder if the end game of the NPA is a landscape that predates aborigines...no wildfire means no need for expensive toys and massive, expensive, over staffed command and control.

The Straddie fire is looking more like fuel reduction now the humidity is up.

[PLovett]

OZ, that book is one of the most significant books to have been published in Australia and apart from some of the more esoteric corners of the ABC it has received virtually no publicity. :ugh: However, because it denies the basic greenie scream that we are denuding Australia it has b-all chance of getting a wider audience. :mad:

Sorry for the thread drift but if notice was taken of what he has written there would be no need for fire bombers at all. There, back to the thread. :ok:

[Wunwing]

We seem to have had a number of major disasters (Canberra, Victoria, Tasmania,Springwood) in recent years without the right questions being asked.

I've just been to Springwood and the questions there are about the NSW Govt poor performance in reconstruction. No one seems to be asking about the poor performance of emergency services or if the nursing home deaths that occurred during and after the evacuations were preventable.

The place is full of signs praising the Fire services which did a good job with what they had but no mention of the overall poor result caused by unsuitable and limited air resources.

I haven't been to Lithgow but that fire is a classic where fire resources weren't allowed access initially due to explosives/security concerns but a large air attack would not have had the same constraint.

Unfortunately, this is a country that needs heros and these fires produced many of those so no one in authority wants to rock the boat.We here on PPrune will just have to accept on this subject that the rest of the World is wrong and we invented the right solution, even if it doesn't work very well.

Wunwing

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Nice demo......

Perhaps every highway 'should' have one..???

Canadian CL-415 Water bomber puts out traffic accident - YouTube


Looks like the 'old Mortein' ad......"One Flick & Its Gorne"....
Cheers :p

[Igrane]

It is bit strange that Australia is trying to beat bushfire without Canadairs.How many homes must be lost or lives before they find out way to buy them.They can scoop water from shallow waters even inside busy ports or rivers.Seems it is easier and cheaper to loose homes,lives,forest etc.. than spend some money for CL-415s.Every year the same story and new damage.They just watch in the sky and wait for rain like recently when fire burnt on North Stradbroke island for days.What do you think that CL415 could not scoop water somewhere around island or from Brisbane river? Look on Youtube or some other sites what pilots do in Greece,Italy,Croatia,France etc and where about they scoop water.
We cant beat huge fire with those tiny Pipers or helicopters.:=

[Mach E Avelli]

Yesterday I was sitting on the deck of my boat in a bay in Southern Tassie watching two helicopters at work on a couple of very small fires nearby.
They had unlimited access to water, light wind conditions and seemingly everything in their favour, but still worked solidly for two days to finish the job. One seemed to be having problems with its bucket occasionally dropping its load before it got to the fire, but regardless it seemed like a lot of costly hours and effort flown for a minor fire.
Struck me that a larger fixed wing aircraft like a Bae146 working out of Cambridge or Hobart would have probably done the job in two runs taking maybe half an hour each. Or a CL215 scooping from the same bay as the choppers in not much more time.
But I am no expert, so correct me if that would not have been the case.

[solowflyer]

Ever tried to put a Bon Fire out with a bucket of water? Takes a fair bit of doing.
They can't put the fire out totally, all the bombers can do is try to contain it and not let it get any bigger.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Depends how big the bucket is to start with:E

[yr right]

Ive said this before and ill say it again. The RFS don't wont aircraft they only have them because the public now expect it. They wont Flash red trucks with flashing lights and staff they don't have to pay for. They wont fires they don't put fires out as soon as they start, they let them go wow we have this great big fire now, now I get my head on the TV and can ask for more funds get the picture.
It is empire building
Im not talking about the many great people that volunteer there time and lives but they let down by what's above them

[yr right]

Well smash you ever done any work with them from an aviation view. I have and I can tell you things that would you would never believe, trust me I don't lie and have no need to. There is a bigger picture than you will ever know. Like I said aircraft are not Red fire trucks.

[yr right]

Smash there are so much I cant tell, how ever its on the pubic record. I suggest you look at the court case over the Canberra fires. The state lost the case and where found guilty . The state change the law so the state cannot be sued. Would you like me to continue.
Sorry to tell the truth and I have had others on this site who are also in the know agree with me and what I have said.

[Andy_P]

Just spotted this thread.

Worth noting that the bushfire risk would be mitigated if people actually did more back burning. Its better for the environment here in Aus, and it reduces the risk of major fires. Problem is there is to many city slickers who move to the bush areas and refuse to back burn. Not sure whether it's because they are scared or because they have some stupid green concepts in their head. I have a mate who refuses to backburn, and I just cant figure out why. HE is in a prime spot to get killed if a bushfire comes through, and no matter what I tell him he wont listen. If you have ever been caught in a bushfire, you will understand why its so important.

So rather than paying exorbitant amounts of money transporting fire bombing aircraft from EU to AUS , perhaps we would be better of spending the money getting rural fire brigades educating people about back burning, and out there doing effective back burns. A proactive approach to the situation would be far more appropriate.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

A grass fire here in ML took out a mates house up the back of Wallan. He loved the idea of trees around his house and all over his acreage. Granted, the fire got hot enough thru the scrub around his area that it crowned and really let rip...lost his shed, his race car and tools and almost lost his house...story behind that!. The moral of the story? He has bought a chainsaw and now there is a ten meter kill zone around his house and property boundary...F@%% the greens AND the CFnA! He says.

[yr right]

Prevention is better than the cure. Once the fire takes hold there not much you can do if there nothing that has been done to prevent it in the first place. Its not well known but the political view of the RFS and the state govs get extra $$$$$$ if the fire get lagre enough from the federal gov. Hence why if you have not notice how long it take to get aircraft into the fire before it takes hold.

[Wunwing]

Getting back to my earlier post on page 2 of this thread, I notice that Buffalo Airways have obtained one of the ex Aero Union Orions.

Looks like they are viable after all.

Wunwing

[onehotflyer]

Where can you train to fly one of those? Im getting bored of long haul.

[500N]

and now there is a ten meter kill zone around his house and property boundary...F@%% the greens AND the CFnA! He says.

He'll need more than 10 metres on a really bad day.

[Subversive1]

We need a holistic approach to fire fighting, with aviation forming a part of that. The NAFC is a good start, but not every state has signed up yet. Also,we can't just always have what we've always had. Aviation firefighting needs to be a performance-evaluated, evolving capability. This means achieving the best capability for best use of funds.

The main advantages of aviation in fire fighting are rapid detection/provision of fire intelligence, rapid attack/containment, and increased situational awareness for fire commanders. At the moment, we are not achieving the best of these capabilities in the most efficient way.

[catseye]

Subversive, have a look at the RFS Canobolas zone plan for bad days. Drommy or 802 can often beat the red truck to the fire as they are dispatched at the same time. Lets the ground crew do quick mop up and go home.

Parkies similar for RAFT chasing lighting strikes.

Very effective combination in initial attack. :ok:

[Wunwing]

I had an interesting night last night with a local community leader in one of last seasons badly burnt areas.I had the temerity to ask when the enquiry into last years fire was being held. The answer was we dont need one. When I asked about the poor ground response that I observed during the beginning of that fire, I was told that this was because all the fire fighters were at work so the time delay was understandable.I just give up.

These people dont deserve anything better.They actually believe that red trucks with lots of flashing lights will save the world.

Wunwing

[currawong]

Topical zombie thread.

The bigger equipment is here, right now.

So are the fires. Right now.

How do they stack up?

Seems to be a lot of properties lost if the media is to be believed.

Interested to hear the angles.

[ohallen]

New aviation resources give help from above - NSW Rural Fire Service (http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/news-and-media/general-news/new-aviation-resources-give-help-from-above)

Here is the link to the press release in NSW referring to DC10, C130 and aircranes. Were they used in Victoria or left sitting on the ground up here?

[zanzibar]

Two C-130's, a Skycrane and a Chinook used at Lorne plus a significant number of other aircraft. The "chook" sent down from NSW, I believe.

[red_dirt]

Ive said this before and ill say it again. The RFS don't wont aircraft they only have them because the public now expect it. They wont Flash red trucks with flashing lights and staff they don't have to pay for. They wont fires they don't put fires out as soon as they start, they let them go wow we have this great big fire now, now I get my head on the TV and can ask for more funds get the picture.
It is empire building
Im not talking about the many great people that volunteer there time and lives but they let down by what's above them

The award for the dumbest comment of 2015 goes tooooooo????

Yr right!!!!!

look maybe you're actually right in the fact that the district officers want to front up to a coronial or a parliamentary committee explaining why the world burnt to the ground all because they were too pig headed to have air support All so they could use the flash red trucks.

I'm sure that a 80k per year public servant reaching the end of his career really wants the risk of him losing it all. What I hear is that the vollos on the ground don't like them because they don't go and get to play.

[Section28- BE]

Where do the "C-130's" originate (/who's operating them...??) from...??

And further, are they 'Brokered' in here (along with the DC-10)....???

Thanks in advance.

Rgds all/& H N/Y
S28- BE

[Car RAMROD]

The Hercs are from Coulson I believe

[Fris B. Fairing]

Please forgive the thread drift but I noticed TV coverage of an Erickson Aircrane using a bucket on a long line. It later emerged that they were picking up from the ocean so the logical conclusion is that the long line and the bucket keeps saltwater away from the tanks, pumps and airframe. However, I'm now told that an Aircrane has been seen fitted with the tank and snorkel and picking up from the ocean. Can anyone explain?

HNY to all.

[PLovett]

Fris, I would think the long line & bucket would be so they could get it down in the gullies. It was tiger country where that fire is.

[josephfeatherweight]

The award for the dumbest comment of 2015 goes tooooooo????

Yr right!!!!!



But he said it in 2014...
I won't rule him out of the 2015 award, though... :}

[Subversive1]

Where do the "C-130's" originate (/who's operating them...??) from...??

And further, are they 'Brokered' in here (along with the DC-10)....???

Thanks in advance.

Rgds all/& H N/Y
S28- BE

They are direct to operator contracts, sole source. Even open contract bids are for operators only, no brokers. The only time brokers come into play is for surge charter requirements.

[Eddie Dean]

Yr Right maybe be a bit of a sh1t stirrer in these parts, but he is one of the few men I would trust to be beside me with a rifle.
The Empire building he referred to is fact.

[rjtjrt]

Get the CSIRO to report on the use of aerial attack with the various assets we have now, and other potential assets we could use (Canadair, etc).
CSIRO presumably have no agenda to persue, and can hopefully be relied upon to issue an objective, and an authoratative and well researched report.

[Eddie Dean]

Rj, it seems in recent times the supply of air attack assets has been centralised.
Hopefully this will stop a lot of the silliness.

[red_dirt]

Eddie, he may be a good operator in a hicksville brigade of 3 but im sorry, that is typical of old school vollo bad attitude towards the white shirts.

I know vollo captains building empires does that give me the right to label all bushies as empire builders?

Im not bushie bashing here and i know that really isnt the place to be talking about it but old school bushies need to realize and appreciate its because of these supposed empire builders the rfs' budget has increased 10 fold since 94 and the service has moved out of the stone age into modern day times with new appliances, aircraft, ppe, training, systems, procedures and legal protections.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

....ten times the budget, more and better( more expensive) and they still cannot put out a fire. And you have put your finger on the exact problem red_dirt! THE problem is the lack of local knowledge of fire behaviour in the local environment. Local fire captains had the authority to perform hazard reduction when and as required. In Vic, the bush was completely burnt of scrub hazards every five years. There hadn't been any hazard reduction on the surf coast since ash Wednesday in 1983... The bush around Gembrook is exactly the same. The litter is over a metre deep in some valleys up there.

Like a wise old blackfella said this year up in the Kakadu...
...if you don't burn the bush and look after it the lightning will come and take everything!

It doesn't matter how many shiny trucks or big water bombers you have, if you do not burn out the trash you are doomed to watch the bush turn into hell on earth so that NOTHING will stop it!

[Eddie Dean]

What ozbusdriver said:ok:

[unexplained blip]

Get the CSIRO to report on the use of aerial attack with the various assets we have now, and other potential assets we could use (Canadair, etc).
CSIRO presumably have no agenda to persue, and can hopefully be relied upon to issue an objective, and an authoratative and well researched report.

Done, and continues to be looked at: e.g., Evaluation of Aerial Suppression Techniques and Guidelines | BFCRC Legacy (http://www.bushfirecrc.com/projects/a31/evaluation-aerial-suppression-techniques-and-guidelines).

In Aus conditions, putting a fire out is very difficult. Once an initial attack has failed (first 30 mins or so) it is mainly about seeking containment and then having the fire run out of fuel or being substantially rained on, than seeking to directly extinguish it. Aerial bombing the buggery out of at least the larger fires isn't seen as a viable tactic (e.g., the current Wye River in Vic). Places like Canada are different.

The design of aerial firefighting assets is not sufficiently mature either. One particular airliner-based design, for example, has a high drop capacity but it is contended (backed by research) that the tank design leads to slugging of the release of retardant, in turn leaving gaps in the intended containment line and therefore enabling the fire to progress. That hasn't stopped certain governments from spending big bucks keeping the public onside by way of retaining its services... the whole analytics/cost-benefit thing for firefighting and fire mitigation is a dogs breakfast. (Will note that the C130, as a counter example, has a better reputation.)

As for the points (other posts) about hitting fires hard early, even on a hideous day like Black Saturday 2009 the vast majority of fire starts (more than 200) were tamed by initial attack from the ground. For my mind, the most open question is around whether air resources should be used to more aggressively pounce on small fires in tricky locations like the Otways. I feel that this might indeed be something that flows from an analysis of the current fire there.

[Section28- BE]

Giday U/B

So "the Phil" got it 'Right' the first time in the early 2000's....????, Skycranes and all comers at CBR, etc..... for review.

Leaving aside fuel reduction and the 'holistic' approach- to burn, down The Bottom End............ and what you blokes deal with/are doing.

Please do note: We do 'it' in bigger country and are lucky to get any assets (we provide those- at own expense) on-site inside 30-45mins or maybe beyond the hour.............. pending, but as stated- we are doing it in bigger/flatter (pick your mark) country- and I acknowledge that, with the option to wait, then attack, as it were............

Had occasion (in a preceding life) as a favour- to Customs/Immigration Clear for Bombardier, a CL-415 for that process in CBR..............., back then.

Personally- I was more than impressed with the Design/Structure and 'Method for Purpose' (as explained by the Proponents, given...) of that machine. (Foam Injection/Management, included)

Unlike Herc's they won't 'Clap Hands' overhead, when it gets hot and sweaty and in common with the Aircrane- we are talking ex Vietnam War machinery or beyond, (and put the Crop Dusters in there as well..., no onus on the concept, at all..- vale Col), doing something that was never part of the original Design Brief................

Would be interested to hear your perspective/views, vis: that part of the world- and 6/or so, of 'em (CL-415's) in a line/cycle.............., without trying to be a quarsie "Sales Consultant"- and I am certainly not that!!!

Tks, and Rgds
S28- BE

[witwiw]

There hadn't been any hazard reduction on the surf coast since ash Wednesday in 1983...

Not exactly correct. These have been going on over the years throughout the Otways. In fact, of current relevance, there was a hazard reduction burn immediately to the NW of Kenett River around mid-2015.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Honestly witwiw, if the hazard burns were done there would be no fire. There should no more than four years maximum and at least two years between each coup. If the fire did get going it would quickly hit a newly burnt off area and extinguish itself. I would really want to believe that reduction burns are done but history shows otherwise in Vic. Hells bells, these idiots cannot even manage their own fires let alone a lightning strike.

Case in point...during the CB fires, the fire ran into a patch of land that was burnt off three years prior, it died there on the spot.

I can get you in my fourbie and I can show you land that hasn't been burnt for decades....you cannot see ten feet into it for scrub undergrowth.

However, I must add...the scorched earth mob put a dozer and grader through the tracks up and around gembrook...could be this spring they may actually do something about the fuel hazard...I live in hope!

[layman]

From a 2002 report to Commonwealth parliament

Is Fuel Reductiion Burning the Answer? ? Parliament of Australia (http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/CIB/cib0203/03Cib08)

Quote from Phil Cheney (CSIRO scientist) - possibly Australia's foremost expert on bushfires.

"For the first 18 months to two years [after hazard reduction] the fire will stop on a prescribed burn. After two years it will continue to burn through it, but it will burn at a lower and manageable intensity, and as the years go by the intensity builds up as the fuel builds up. Prescribed burning is not designed to stop fires. It is designed to reduce their intensity, so the impacts are lower and you have a sporting chance of suppressing it, even under extreme conditions."

Also in the report:

"under extreme conditions bushfires will burn across land with very low fuel loads"

and

"fuel reduction burning is but one method of hazard reduction employed by State Forests and the area grazed for hazard reduction is six times the area burned on an annual basis."

An example of an extreme case ...

I can't find any reference to it on the 'net but my faulty memory recalls listening to a woman ringing in to a radio station about how the Black Saturday bushfire had burnt around their farm (with help from a CFA crew) but hadn't burnt the farmhouse.

Unfortunately, the next day or so, the winds changed, the fire returned and burnt out their farmhouse when there was "nothing" left to burn.

regards
layman

[John Eacott]

Having worked on firegrounds in NSW in the 2000-01 season and then exactly the same area again in 2001-02 as fires burned through supposedly safe areas, the science of hazard reduction burns can be seen to be less than exact.

As we allow fuel loads to build up there is obviously an increased risk, but the history of out-of-control HRBs (Lancefield is just up the road to me and a mate lost his house) raises more questions than answers.

I also have a house at Dinner Plain which was well protected by high country cattle grazing. Now it needs regular slashing of the grass around the village, let alone the uncontrolled growth out in the surrounding area.

[red_dirt]

Plus 1 for John Elliot

There are hazard reductions then there are "hazard reductions"

Sometimes the burn plan limitations are so strict that the completed burn holds no strategic advantage, basically takes off the top layer of fuel, leaves another load untouched, kills the leaves in the top layers then they all drop subsequently replacing the burnt stuff.

[witwiw]

Ozbusdriver - I was commenting on an incorrect statement, nothing more, and not the effectiveness of such burns. I'm a regular in the Otways and come across reduction burns regularly. In the example I mentioned, though, the fires didn't get to that area near Kennett River to put it to the test.

On that point, I doubt if it would have made a difference on the day given the intensity and the fact that the fire was advancing through the canopies. Hazard reduction burns take care of underbrush and not much more. The fire you speak of, CB (Canberra?), was that in the canopies or in the scrub beneath? I'd suspect the latter if the fire petered out once reaching the previously burnt area.

Thanks for the Fourbie offer but I already do that myself and concur with your observations.

[layman]

In Canberra in 2003, hazard reduction may have helped in stopping the fires reaching the pine plantations literally across the road from suburbia.

Most of the houses lost were in the Weston Creek area, next too / near the pine plantations (now gone). In the conditions on the day, there was no chance once it hit the pines.

Winds on the day meant we had fire debris (burnt leaves etc) falling in our back yard from the fires when the front was still about 10km away.

regards
layman

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Witwiw, granted, my opinion re-actual burns down the surf coast is not based on first hand experience as yours. However, as you say, the intensity of the fire and the fact it was crowning. A fire will not crown without the intensity of a ground fire to sustain it. No fuel load, no crown fire!

I suppose I am causing a divergence from aerial fire fighting....

On black Saturday, no system or combination of systems could stop a fire in the conditions on the day...period! In CB, correct, once the fire got into the pines....and windrows of timber litter...it was all over!

[Supermouse3]

Here in WA we see no sign of the 146,DC10 or Hercules- maybe after 100 homes are destroyed we might, surely 2 Canadiars could drop just as much as the 146 in the same or similar timeframe, they don't have to land to reload and are probably more accurate, how many canadairs are available, 5 for each state sounds like a good idea, along with the current fleet of DC10, 146 and hercs we could have an Australia wide effort- instead of each state for themselves!

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

I realise that I have said all this in other posts....but why cannot the current C-130 fleet which we, the taxpayers own, actually be utilised in the dropping of fire retardant 'packages' / 'balloons', rolled out of the rear cargo door, directly onto a fire?
Its true that they would then have to return to a 'suitable aerodrome' to reload, but in this case YPJT is not too far away?
OK YPPH then. The transit time would be 4 minutes longer....

The area around the town of Yarloop etc is 'flat'. North / South runs preferred.

Even the CL-215 type could water 'skim' at the adjacent coast and pick sea water, or is this not allowed?

I just do not know how those 'in charge' think. I would have thought that the cost of a town the size / population of Yarloop would be 'worth it'.
Not to mention the adjacent dairy paddocks and vineyards.

And, just how long to get such an aircraft here - a day or so - or...gee whiz, station a couple over here every fire season!

I realise that I am crying after the horse has bolted....but....all serious answers will be entertained....

No cheers, nope...none at all..!!:ugh:

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Here's an idea from Boeing utilising the C-17......

Boeing Frontiers Online (http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/august/i_ids4.html)

Potential??

[junior.VH-LFA]

but why cannot the current C-130 fleet which we, the taxpayers own, actually be utilised in the dropping of fire retardant 'packages' / 'balloons'

The RAAF C-130 fleet is already over utilised carrying out operational tasks and training for operations, let alone being held to the beck and call of state fire organisations. Fatigue life would increase, more assets would be required, and the cost would be enormous.

Much cheaper to hire contracted services.

[onetrack]

Griffo - while we have former useless senior Police officers running DFES - who have bugger-all leadership ability, and are totally out of their depth when it comes to being pro-active on the fire suppression and fire containment ideas - then we will continue to have more Yarloops.

Don't forget that at least one former assistant Police Commissioner in a major managerial position in DFES, resigned right before he was going to be sacked for total incompetence - so he got parachuted into DFES as a reward from mates in the system.

The imbeciles we currently call "leaders" in the Govt, the DFES, and a dozen other important Govt bodies, are good at "media performance", quoting statistics, numbers and figures galore - but not a one of them could be shown as showing real leadership in arranging to have serious-size aerial water bombers on standby during our driest and hottest Spring and Summer for at least 30 yrs.

Nothing has been learnt from the Dwellingup disaster - and people such as Wayne Gregson would be out of their depth running a chook raffle.

Typically, it has been revealed that Yarloop ran out of "mains pressure" water during the height of the fire.
This happened because Yarloop is not on the Perth and South West reticulated "mains" water system - which is largely fed by high-mounted reservoirs and tanks to get the pressure.

Yarloop water supply is fed from a local dedicated water supply dam and catchment, from which, water is pressurised and reticulated to the town via an electric pump.
When the fire burnt down a serious number of power poles, the power supply went off due to circuit breakers being tripped - and as a result, pressurised water was no longer available in Yarloop - resulting in locals becoming unable to use mains water to fight the fire, and fire trucks having to find other sources of water supplies to be able to refill tanks.

It probably would have taken less than $50,000 to install an auto-start genset in a small fire-proof brick building, to kick in, and keep up the pressurised town water supply, to enable faster fire truck refilling and to enable locals to fight fires with mains water.

However, such forward-planning is totally beyond anyone in the heirarchy of local "leadership", and I guess we can look forward to more Yarloops due to that lack of forward-planning ability.

Don't look forward to any serious local investment in having substantial-capacity water-bombers on standby for W.A. during Summer - our "leaders" have other more important projects at hand - such as Elizabeth Quay, and a 100 other pet useless projects, that they can get their name and plaques on.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Mr LFA,
Re "Much cheaper to hire contracted services."

Then why haven't we??

The AT's do try, but something larger & able to deliver more suppressant / retardant seems to be warranted. ??

Mr O,
Thanks mate, I was trying not to get depressed / distressed...... :ok:
I'm not a fan either.......

Cheers

[Supermouse3]

And with the exception of the DC10, the hercs and RJ85 would easily be able to land at Busselton to refill with water, cuts the transit time to what, 5 mins?

How about not cutting up the old caribous when they were being scrapped and outfitting them with tanks?
2 of cobham's 146's are being scrapped, they could be operated by Cobham on behalf of the govmint!

[onetrack]

There's info on the W.A. DFES site about their use of Helitacs, and the DFES approach to aerial fire-fighting.

DFES - Helitacs (http://www.dfes.wa.gov.au/aboutus/operationalinformation/helicoptersandaircraft/Pages/helitacs.aspx)

Keep in mind - that even the Americans and Canadians will tell you outright, that major fires are NOT put out by water bombers - the water-bombers hit hot spots, and enable ground crews to get in to attack and suppress the fire.

However, it is very obvious that the current W.A. fleet of Helitacs and the eight fixed-wing Airtractors on hand, are barely able to put a dent in a fire of the size we currently have in W.A.

This fire currently has a front of 222 kms, and has destroyed around 80,000 hectares. It's still burning and is showing no sign of slowing to any extent.

What is needed in an extreme fire such as this is, some serious equipment thrown at it.
The DFES makes a big noise about the money the W.A. Govt spent in 2012/2013 on aerial fire-fighting - quoting a figure of $20M spent.

However, we are currently looking at property and infrastructure losses running into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
In the case of the Yarloop Rail Heritage Workshops, we have lost a world-class piece of rail history that is irreplaceable and of incalculable value.

$20M looks like a pretty miserable outlay, and a case of false economy, if the Govt and DFES reckons that was a huge sum to spend on aerial fire-fighting, and are reluctant to spend more.

This is the same mob who will happily spend $440M on a pet project such as Elizabeth Quay - of dubious benefit to the State - but they'd baulk at spending another $20M on major aerial fire-fighting ability - content instead to see fire losses run into the hundreds of millions.

Here's a gallery of the fire damage - and keep in mind, this is not the final tally.

Waroona/Yarloop fire damage - photo gallery (http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/families-evacuated-in-waroona-bushfire/image-gallery/e8c48a456e6a3b18a3b4914a48fe428c)

[log0008]

I can confirm that both the Large air tankers from Vic and NSW were offered to WA but the offer was not accepted. Mind you they have already been to WA this year. Also note that the town of Yarloop was hit after dark so airsupport would have not been able to work anyway.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Re your 'note'....

Yes, that was around 9pm on Thurs night.

From WA News -
"YARLOOP residents have described how they tried to fight the flames before fleeing the town at the last minute.
Dairy farmer Joe Angi stayed until about 9pm on Thursday trying to protect his property with his brother before fleeing at the last minute."

The fire was started by lightning on Wednesday.....It burned all Wed night and all day Thursday, and was reported as 'widespread' before reaching the town of Yarloop on Thursday night.....

"Heavy Assets" MAY have been able to prevent the majority of the losses....

In my opinion.

[havick]

Has anyone commenting here actually flown a Helitak or Bomber on contract before?

A lot of the comments would appear otherwise.

[John Eacott]

Has anyone commenting here actually flown a Helitak or Bomber on contract before?

Flown and owned my Helitack and Firebirds on CWN.

[currawong]

And still no answer to the question -

"How is the bigger equipment stacking up now that it is here?"

Have all the problems gone away or are the same problems presenting?

[havick]

And still no answer to the question -

"How is the bigger equipment stacking up now that it is here?"

Have all the problems gone away or are the same problems presenting?

Sitting in the seat of a B212 on a fire last year as a Helitak and being able to watch both the Coulson C130 and the DC10 drop in quick succession I can say that the C130 was super effective. The DC10 was pretty much a waste of time dropping from too high and too fast left a very unimpressive impact on the fire/retardant line they were laying down.

It appeared that the C130 flew the same patterns that the SEAT's were able to.

[OZ-G10]

When were the LATs in WA this year? Log

[OZ-G10]

Griffo. As you said Yarloop was lost during the night, early hours of the morning. But then end off by saying that (Heavy Assets may have saved a lot of the Losses) How exactly?

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Er.....
Hitting the fire on Wed. arvo or Thursday...all day ?

When it hit parts of Waroona, it was already 'bad', and being pushed WSW by the very gusty ENE. (Broadly speaking). Lots of sudden wind changes within the fire zone took it in most directions.
Sad!

p.s. It is very easy to be an 'armchair critic' after the event.

However, the apparent aversion to the use of 'heavy assets', like the C-130 type which we already own and have fully paid for, even the older models which we 'donate' to other countries like Indonesia, when they could have a valuable use HERE!

Subject to the usual airframe limitations / issues etc, it has already been said above that the C-130 type was 'super effective' in another theatre.

It does not have to get down 'in the weeds'. The turb. / vis etc would prohibit that, but surely it has the capacity to drop 'packages' of water / retardant on rollers out thru the back door from a 'reasonably safe' altitude onto the leading 'hotspots' of the fire whilst remaining clear of the main smoke column?
No, I am not a Herc pilot, but if is able to be done elsewhere, then why not here...?

Cheers

[Flying Binghi]

via OZBUSDRIVER #103:
Witwiw, granted, my opinion re-actual burns down the surf coast is not based on first hand experience as yours. However, as you say, the intensity of the fire and the fact it was crowning. A fire will not crown without the intensity of a ground fire to sustain it. No fuel load, no crown fire!

I suppose I am causing a divergence from aerial fire fighting....


Hardly a divergence. An understanding of the causation can best decide what air assets are required for the control.

I would suggest that a properly maintained burn-off regime would only need the local agy fixed wing and rotary operators as the back-up air capability of the fire services.

The current greeny caused clustafeck in WA was easily foreseen as a megafluck about to happen that would need heavy lifters to fight.

Jo Nova has compiled some background to the current fires...

From 2014:

"THE horrifying scale of the bushfire threat faced by West Australians is made clear by this map exposing the amount of old vegetation across the state.

The map reveals the build-up of fuel - combustible trees, shrub and ground litter - aged over seven years near Perth and in the South-West.

This is the age it becomes almost impossible to control on even average summer conditions - let alone catastrophic days with soaring temperatures and fast winds.

Rising fuel ages and a failure to hit prescribed burn targets means bushfire is WA's "pre-eminent hazard", according to the State Emergency Management Committee..."

Continues with map and article: Yarloop fire: History repeats ? in 1961, a 41 day inferno destroyed 160 buildings and burned a larger area in South-West WA « JoNova (http://joannenova.com.au/2016/01/yarloop-fire-history-repeats-in-1961-a-41-day-inferno-destroyed-160-buildings-and-burned-a-larger-area-in-south-west-wa/#more-47270)




.

[havick]

Griffo, I wouldn't take my words too much out of context. Yes the c130 was effective (in comparison to the dc10 on that particular day), that being said it was a Coulson modified c130 with drivers that do firefighting as their bread and butter, not a secondary task.

With that in mind, I didn't say the heavies were the answer, nor do they save the day, it's just another tool that certainly complements the rest of the firefighting fleet contracted by NAFC.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Understood Mr H,

However, we do have those aircraft here in Australia, even the 'older ones', and with 'suitable training' surely our RAAF qualified pilots could provide some 'good effect'?

My suggestion does not involve converting the aircraft to water tanker types, as in the Coulson types.

This would be a very expensive mod. and would make that / those airframes 'specialist' airframes.

Rather, the dropping of large water / retardant 'balloon packages' out the back onto the leading edge hotspots is what I had in mind.

The 'balloons' could be designed to simply drop all the way and to burst their contents onto to the ground (Grass fire front), or, with the use of a light wire cable around the plastic balloon, to break open and spray the contents....

OK I'll go and get a coffee....

Cheers;)

[havick]

Griffo, good thoughts but it the bladder idea you suggest would most likely be ineffective not to mention extremely dangerous to the crews on the ground.

Rather, the dropping of large water / retardant 'balloon packages' out the back onto the leading edge hotspots is what I had in mind.

The 'balloons' could be designed to simply drop all the way and to burst their contents onto to the ground (Grass fire front), or, with the use of a light wire cable around the plastic balloon, to break open and spray the contents....

Why would NAFC and other organisations want to spend millions on your above suggestion which doesn't provide a drop pattern anywhere near what they want or expect for their money.

The second point to think about is having another govt organisation run and maintain aircraft is just another branch that requires it's own admin teams, management, oversight etc with all the inefficiencies that go with it. Not to mention the fact that they really have no KPI's to answer to with aircraft U/S's, lack of crewing etc etc

If you want more C130's et al, just lobby for more funding to go into NAFC's bucket and they will put on more contract machines fit for purpose and crewed by the guys/gals that do it day in day out. No point re-inventing the wheel and coming up with a half baked solution at greater cost, as we tend to regularly as Aussies (thinking we know better than everyone else).

[currawong]

Griffo -

MAFFS - modular airborne fire fighting system was tested '81 - '83 care of RAAF 36 Sqn in a C130.

It was found to be relatively costly and the amount carried was frequently offset by lengthy turnaround times; offering no advantage over agricultural aircraft pressed into service at that time.

Forest Commission Victoria was responsible for the evaluation.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Thanks Guys .....

The Pre filled balloons already on plastic pallets (Available) might make the turnaround times better.
Pre arranged pallets would be loaded in a few minutes, engines running.....
And the dropping would be on the fire front - no ground personnel in there.....

Anyway, t'was worth floating the idea for a 'try'.... See Yas

Cheers:ok:

[Stanwell]

Binghi,
Spot on. I couldn't agree more.

The conducting of regular off-season burn-offs to reduce critical ground fuel levels is a well-understood science.
To all except to latte-sipping greenies and 'sensitive' politicians, that is.

In my time with Parks & Wildlife, the number of properly assessed burn-off recommendations that were rejected
for political reasons caused much despair and loss of morale - particularly when you've then got to go out and fight the fires
which could have been prevented or at least, mitigated.


Currawong,
The MAFFS trials findings were described by some as 'controversial' and budgetary-related, rather than the lack of effectiveness
when the teams were fully worked-up.

[currawong]

Stanwell -

yes operating costs were factored in as part of the trial.

The subsequent '83 - '84 - '85 CSIRO trial results may be of interest.

Or tainted with controversy too I suppose.

[Flying Binghi]

Otaways interim report released:

"...the fire which caused so much damage originated from the lightning strike, not the back-burning.

...burn-out strategy was the best option available to fire crews at the time.

...impacts on Wye River and Separation Creek townships would likely have been far worse than was suffered had the fuel load between the main fire front and Jameison Track not been significantly reduced prior to the spot fire occurring...

...a stronger aerial attack on the fire when it originally started "would have likely had very little impact" because of the dense cover of forest in the Otway Ranges.
Otway Ranges: Dry, difficult fire terrain

And likely the real reason for the dificult fire...

...Otway Ranges ... had not burnt in a major way since 1983...

There are other veiws:

"...Clearly this is an attempt to prevent the coroner looking at the real issues.
...believed more could have been done to attack the fire when it was ignited, with the use of more aerial bombing and repelling crews."

Wye River bushfire: Impact would have been 'far worse' without back-burning, report finds - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-23/wye-river-bushfire-impact-would-have-been-far-worse/7109478)




.

[chimbu warrior]

Aviation firm stuggles to stay aloft | The Columbian (http://www.columbian.com/news/2016/aug/12/aviation-firm-stuggles-to-stay-aloft/)

After several years of spending summers down under, Elvis may face an uncertain future. Rather odd that only a couple of days earlier they gained a contract extension in Australia.

RSS Content | Investor Relations | Erickson Aircrane (http://investors.ericksonaircrane.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=237068&p=RssLanding&cat=news&id=2193690)