Buying Water Bombers For Australia?

[Sunfish]

There appears to be some debate about Australia buying its own dedicated water bomber aircraft as a result of the current bushfire emergency.What say you?

[Mr Google Head]

There appears to be some debate about Australia buying its own dedicated water bomber aircraft as a result of the current bushfire emergency.What say you?

by ‘Australia’ do you mean the government? Federal? State? Private Australian companies?

such an exercise organised by the public sector would inevitably a complete ‘shemozzle’

what would the ‘dedicated water bomber aircraft’ do for the other non - burning months of the year? Operate a successful business case overseas and overseen by a government organisation here? Sounds an unlikely theory.

anyone who thinks a couple of big water bombers can control the bushfires seen in this country is also kidding themselves

[Sunfish]

Having our own water bombers in Autumn may increase our capability to do more controlled burns.

[Stationair8]

Let’s see the aircraft will have to be based in a marginal seat, the CEO would have to be transgender, chief pilot would have to be female, family friendly working conditions for all staff, social media team, talent acquisition team, etc!


Should work okay Sunfish!

[currawong]

The utilisation required of said equipment will see the idea quietly shelved, methinks.

There may be a window for more year round utililisation of existing local equipment on standby for the imminent more frequent hazard reduction work ahead....

[The Shovel]

This years bushfires are an unprecedented phenomenon, whilst devasting and an enormous toll socially and on an environmentally, to believe this will be the new norm is as ridiculous as some of the conspiracy theories and reporting about the fires on social media.

The Autum idea is a good one. Controlled burns with an aerial water bombing loitering over head should the situation get out of control.
Bushfires are a year round, World Wide natural occurence. It should be not be beyond the reals of possibility, that a number of Governmemts around the world pool some reasources to have a Aerial Bombing fleet that can be moved to various countries on a seasonal basis to fight these fires.

We will watch CNN in sadness and complete horror in a few months as Wildfires ravage the hills outside Malibu and Beverly Hills, as our favourite TV and Movie stars homes are at risk or are burned to the ground in the annual fire season in America.

The solutions are there, it is not in the interest of the powers that be to implement them.

[The Shovel]

I remember the 1994 bushfires that attacked Sydney. My backyard fence burnt in those fires. It was the first year the aerial tanker helicipters came to town. Everyone would remember "Elvis".

I also remember then Premier Bob Carr saying,
"send me the cheque and I will sign it",
in reference to purchasing the choppers for each fire season.
I also remember 2 months later him saying it was an unnecessary expense not justified by the once in a lifetime fire season.

No governmement will ever do anything unless it happens during election season.

[illusion]

In the festival season they could be contracted to dump sparkle on the mardi gras for $500m per annum then in the off season drop water on fires. The pollies will trip over each other to sign the cheque.

Marketing 101 from the Arts Department of a Sydney Uni....

[Machdiamond]

There is a big fleet (I believe 14) of water bombers sitting idle at my home airport (CYQB), and there is talk here of finding some kind of deal with Australia to lease some of them out during our winter here - similar to what is already in place with California.

This would certainly more be cost effective and win-win in terms of utilisation. Fire season here is April to October.

[Global Aviator]

There is a big fleet (I believe 14) of water bombers sitting idle at my home airport (CYQB), and there is talk here of finding some kind of deal with Australia to lease some of them out during our winter here - similar to what is already in place with California.

This would certainly more be cost effective and win-win in terms of utilisation. Fire season here is April to October.

That sounds like common sense!!! Can’t see that under this gubment! Having a seasonal fleet would just be toooooooooo perfecto!

[601]

The Autumn idea is a good one. Controlled burns with an aerial water bombing loitering over head should the situation get out of control

The aircraft could set up containment lines using retardant. This would provide currency and training for both flight and ground crews.

One problem is that the RFS/CFA are a volunteer organisation and may only be able to do hazard reduction at weekends. This could mean a need for full time hazard reduction teams.
Would aircrew be full time or volunteer?

Next question, are there any large waterbombers available for sale anywhere?.
Looking at the fleet, it appears that the airframes are converted by the end user.
The first lot of Viking CL-515 are goig to Indonesia in 2025. Long wait!!

[vee1-rotate]

On the topic, FireAviation website had some more info on the other bomber's that are heading to Australia from the US currently. A couple of MD-87's and more DC-10's it seems.

https://fireaviation.com/2020/01/16/deployment-of-two-air-tankers-to-australia-delayed-by-fog-and-a-volcano/

[Chocks Away]

Let me put some facts on the table here.
Aerial fire bombers have and will always be a State Govt. contractural arrangement. Stop blaming the Federal Govt for your State Govt's inaction and Greens policies!
Over 140 aircrafts are currently here Australia wide with Coulsons having some of the bigger contracts along with the often seen Skycrane/Air-cranes now based in South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales & A.C.T.
There would not be such a bushfire emergency IF:
1) there were not so many F'n arsonists lighting these fires Australia wide (183 arrested already with >200 total sought so far...);
2) The Greens/Labour hadn't locked up the National Parks from grazing, backburns and locked/let firetrails overgrow for the sake of "habitat';
3) Farmers weren't fined by local muppet Local Councils for hazaed reduction on there own land!
... the list goes on but Victoria is a classic case in point, in absolute bureaucratic stupidity and socialist/green idiocricy... EVEN after the 2009 Black Saturday Royal Commission decree that mpre hazard reduction was paramount, they only achieved an average of 10% year on year... only 33% in the last year!
So tell me peeps, what good do you think fleets of fire-bombers from above, are going to do to fix the stupidity of many years worth of huge amounts of un-attended dry undergrowth and follage?
Heads need to roll over this and it comes down to State & Local jurisdictions, NOT as mass media are trying to feed you as Scott Morrison's direct responsibilty, like we were the same as the USA voting system.

[umop apisdn]

Are there not already a lot of Air Tractors in Australia? Would be worthwhile to analyse how we could deploy Air Tractors to complete the same mission of the DC10 or other dedicated bomber fleet, measure the efficacy of both and work it out from there?

[The Shovel]

One problem is that the RFS/CFA are a volunteer organisation and may only be able to do hazard reduction at weekends. This could mean a need for full time hazard reduction teams.
Would aircrew be full time or volunteer?


Easy fix. Pay the local Fireries to do it during the week.
Some are calling this a National Emergency.
So hazard reduction burns need to be done WHENEVER the conditions are suitable. Not when it suits some volunteers. I would think the "token amount" it would cost to pay some professional Fire Men some overtime to conduct controlled burns would be far cheaper then the few Billion this summer is going to cost.

[Fogliner]

AT 802 fireboss, MAAFS systems for C 130, Canadair CL 415, All viable options in my opinion. Went through this a few years back when BC was on fire in Canada.
Wondered why our military wasn't utilizing the Herc's with the MAAFS Modules a lot more.
Would it not be good to provide our Military pilots with flying hours doing firefighting work rather than just parking them or flying non critical missions to stay current?

regards
fog

[rattman]

Let me put some facts on the table here.
Aerial fire bombers have and will always be a State Govt. contractural arrangement. Stop blaming the Federal Govt for your State Govt's inaction and Greens policies!
Over 140 aircrafts are currently here Australia wide with Coulsons having some of the bigger contracts along with the often seen Skycrane/Air-cranes now based in South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales & A.C.T.
There would not be such a bushfire emergency IF:
1) there were not so many F'n arsonists lighting these fires Australia wide (183 arrested already with >200 total sought so far...);
2) The Greens/Labour hadn't locked up the National Parks from grazing, backburns and locked/let firetrails overgrow for the sake of "habitat';
3) Farmers weren't fined by local muppet Local Councils for hazaed reduction on there own land!
... the list goes on but Victoria is a classic case in point, in absolute bureaucratic stupidity and socialist/green idiocricy... EVEN after the 2009 Black Saturday Royal Commission decree that mpre hazard reduction was paramount, they only achieved an average of 10% year on year... only 33% in the last year!
So tell me peeps, what good do you think fleets of fire-bombers from above, are going to do to fix the stupidity of many years worth of huge amounts of un-attended dry undergrowth and follage?
Heads need to roll over this and it comes down to State & Local jurisdictions, NOT as mass media are trying to feed you as Scott Morrison's direct responsibilty, like we were the same as the USA voting system.


Ahhh every bull**** trope pushed by murdoch media

only 20ish arson charges, the rest were littering / open fire charges

NSW is a liberal govt in power for 9years BUT LABOR BUT GREENS, It was the liberal state govt that sacked most of department responsible for maintainence of firetrails and burnoffs

[Wizofoz]

AT 802 fireboss, MAAFS systems for C 130, Canadair CL 415, All viable options in my opinion. Went through this a few years back when BC was on fire in Canada.
Wondered why our military wasn't utilizing the Herc's with the MAAFS Modules a lot more.
Would it not be good to provide our Military pilots with flying hours doing firefighting work rather than just parking them or flying non critical missions to stay current?

regards
fog

The CL415 wouldn't work here- we don't have enough open bodies of water for it to scoop, and it is to slow/expensive to use as a land based asset.

The best solutions for Aus are re purposed airliners- there is no end of supply of low priced feed stock, they can transport big loads at fast speeds, so the relative sparsity of airports is mitigated, and the fact that they don't cost much defrays the problem of low utilisation.

[Wunwing]

Firstly air crew would have to be paid. You just don't fly a B737 or anything else as a part timer. The simulator time alone means its not cost effective. I'm not sure Qantas and Virgin would be too happy letting RFS borrow a few dozen pilots in peak period?.

As far as continuing to lease equipment in as the main source, there are 2 problems.

1 It is increasingly not available due to the overlap of fire seasons.

2 There is no consistency of product in as much as we currently have numerous types of heavies here. Surely the optimum is 2 types of heavies which would allow a much better operational planned response. Consistency will never be an option under a lease in arrangement. A good example of how its done properly is Calfire and the French, Civil and Securite.

Wunwing.

[Torres]

Would love to see anyone trying to put heavy water bombers on the Australian register and operate under an Australian AOC............. CASA would have a field day.

[bankrunner]

Easy fix. Pay the local Fireries to do it during the week.

​​​​​​In NSW, that's what Forestry Corporation and NPWS firefighters used to do before most of them were made redundant a few years ago.

Hazard reduction burning isn't a magic bullet. It helps, but the suggestion that if you HR burn everything all the time you're not going to have massive bushfires is pure idiocy. It's not going to burn all the fuel, even if you did have perfect weather and infinite manpower to safely burn everything every year (which we don't.)

When you get a bunch of wet years, followed by a bunch of dry years, this is what's going to happen. And it's going to happen more frequently with a changing climate and a warming planet.

I've been fighting fires down the south coast for much of the past two months.
​​​​​​
We've had fire rip through spots we had back burned two days before, and the answer for this is simple physics. A crowning eucalyptus fire at 70000kW/m2 is going to burn a lot of fuel that a mild 500W/m2 backburn or HR burn isn't going to consume.

We've also had cases where burning roots and stumps left in the ground have ignited leaf matter and bark that has fallen to the ground after the previous fire has gone through, starting another one.

​​​​​There was a running grass fire where fire went through the same spot twice in five days. The top of the grass burned, leaving the grass below exposed to dry out. That grass too eventually went up.
​​​

[mrdeux]

Would love to see anyone trying to put heavy water bombers on the Australian register and operate under an Australian AOC............. CASA would have a field day.

Then don’t. Let the RAAF have them.

[bankrunner]

Let me put some facts on the table here.

There isn't a single fact in this post. There is, however, a lot of Alex Jones conspiracy theory type stuff. I won't try and address any but the most ignorant points.


1) there were not so many F'n arsonists lighting these fires Australia wide (183 arrested already with >200 total sought so far...);

That figure is a fabrication, and you know it. 24 arsonists have been charged this year, and none of the large campaign fires going at the moment we're started by arson.

2) The Greens/Labour hadn't locked up the National Parks from grazing, backburns and locked/let firetrails overgrow for the sake of "habitat';

For a party that's never been in power anywhere, ever, those greens are pretty powerful eh?

Bushfire abatement works are effectively exempt from environmental legislation. Always have been. Safety wins every time.

Open nation parks up for grazing? You'd never see your sheep again and your cows would starve. You'd also destroy the ecosystems that places like Canberra rely on for their water supplies.

3) Farmers weren't fined by local muppet Local Councils for hazaed reduction on there own land!

In my old brigade, about 30% of our callouts every year were illegal burns lit by idiot farmers that had gotten away.

[bankrunner]

Firstly air crew would have to be paid. You just don't fly a B737 or anything else as a part timer.

No reason they couldn't be full timers. We pay the AMSA crews year round and they fly what, 150 hours a year?

With the bombers flying non stop during fire season and doing a bit of training in the off season, over a year they'd probably average the same sort of utilisation.

After a season like this one the B737 bomber crews might even find more hours in their logbook at the end of the year than the AMSA guys.

[dr dre]

The heart of the issue is that any solution (more waterbombers, more permanent fire staff, more hazard reduction, volunteer incentives, maybe even relocation of people out of high risk fire areas?) is going to cost a lot of money (it’ll be half a billion dollars for the hazard reduction burns (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/fivefold-increase-in-funding-for-hazard-reduction-burns-needed-experts-warn-20200103-p53om0.html) advised by experts in NSW alone).

It’s a complicated problem and there’s no real answer to it except for large increases in spending, are we as a nation prepared to do it?

[Rwy in Sight]

AT 802 fireboss, MAAFS systems for C 130, Canadair CL 415, All viable options in my opinion. Went through this a few years back when BC was on fire in Canada.
Wondered why our military wasn't utilizing the Herc's with the MAAFS Modules a lot more.
Would it not be good to provide our Military pilots with flying hours doing firefighting work rather than just parking them or flying non critical missions to stay current?

regards
fog

I don't have pictures at hand (and I am not sure they are releasable but I will check) but the combination MAAFS systems and C-130 is a VERY bad combination for the C-130. A user of this combination back in the mid 80's ended up grounding one or two C-130 (carrying MAAFSbecause of the corrosion.

Australia will make much better use of those Beriev Be-200 Altair with their water scooping ability and higher speed.

[Sunfish]

LIGHTNING starts most major fires. The CFA doesn’t do fuel reduction burns, the professionals do. The Greens haven’t been in power because labor and liberal governments have pandered to their supporters by adopting the greens nutty environmental policies.

Our CFA station is also an NSP. it’s surrounded by dead killer trees and the council won’t let us remove them because they are habitat trees - until the next fire.

[rattman]

No reason they couldn't be full timers. We pay the AMSA crews year round and they fly what, 150 hours a year?
.

We already have a system that could form the basis of scheme. The reserves, it would take a federal govt that wants to stand up and want to get involved (both politically and financially) and of course legislation change. But it has all the fundamental required for both a full time and an as required force

Purchase of some 737 tankers, they are common plane, ground crew, aircrew spare parts are easily available. The airframes themselves are at a premium atm due to max grounding but that will solves itself soonish, they could be based anywhere in australia due to being such a common aircraft in mainline airlines. Obvious first choice is they base out of where ever the P-8's will be and a RAAF / could be responsible for storage / maintainence during non a fire fighting periods

On the smaller end there have been good results from these float attached 802's

I dont think Cl are the answer unless you get some of the new ones being designed and then multi role them, maybe get some for amsa for a rescue and they can be called up into firebombing roles if and when required

[Global Aviator]

I would imagine there would be enough full time work for local assets. Indonesia is not far away and regularly uses some form of aircraft.

In a year like this there would be no chance of owning enough assets and ones would need to be brought in regardless. Having the assets year round though would allow all kinds of flexibility.

As for CASA and operations, one would not envy that CP!

[currawong]

People are confusing Greens with greenies.

For example, this from something other than the Murdoch press

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/744x1024/abcgippsland_30c0c0e94b88354bbe7b331af30b9cd5421390a2.jpg

[JekiJock]

Talking to the Navy guys in Tumut the other day. They have the ability to sling buckets. But they don't have any. Can't be an overly expensive purchase to kit out the army/Navy choppers to help out more when necessary?

[Wunwing]

Torres.
Its already been done.
Check our VH-NEP?

[Bend alot]

Easy fix. Pay the local Fireries to do it during the week.
Some are calling this a National Emergency.
So hazard reduction burns need to be done WHENEVER the conditions are suitable. Not when it suits some volunteers. I would think the "token amount" it would cost to pay some professional Fire Men some overtime to conduct controlled burns would be far cheaper then the few Billion this summer is going to cost.

I think a major issue is most people think the RFS/CFA are "supplemented" with volunteers that fire fight.

The "firefighters" are the volunteers in the rural areas.

Urban firefighters get paid and work for Fire and Rescue and are responsible for fires in their boundaries. The similarity could be Fire and Rescue NSW and the airport fire service at Sydney airport, they are two completely separate things, but when things go bad they can support each other with "excess" resources but each must maintain it's minimum level of service to it's primary role. So the RFS does get some limited support during the fires but must maintain X resources to protect it's defined area and response times, leaving the RFS mostly using volunteers.

My personal opinion is RFS should have full time front line staff (equal to the number of police in that area as a start) and they are supplemented with volunteers.

As far as aircraft match the Canadian fleet and share them over the two seasons staggering if needed.

[MickG0105]

LIGHTNING starts most major fires.
Does it?

That contention is contradicted by the findings of the only large-scale review of the causes of bushfires in the last 20 years, the Australian Institute of Criminology's 2008 analysis of some 280,000 bushfires as recorded by 18 different Australian fire and land management agencies representing all states and territories.

Some 40 percent of those fires did not have a cause assigned by the responding fire agency. However, of the 165,000-odd fires that did, the assigned causes were as follows:

Suspicious - 37%
Accidental - 35%
Deliberate - 13%
Natural - 6%
Re-ignition - 5%
Other - 4%

​​​​​​Within the 'Natural' causes category, lightning makes up about 66%.

[Chocks Away]

Bankrunner - who the heck is Alex Jones? :rolleyes:
You're certainly living on a different planet than I, as just 3 days ago 2 teenagers here were caught lighting fires in the scrub in the suburbs south of the runway.
You probably gathered I don't watch "The Project" and other tripe shows alike.
Read the Commission findings on Victoria's Black Saturday 2009 and you'll start to realise what a clusterfug we're in, as it's got worse since!

[trashie]

Having flown the MAAFS system during the Ash Wednesday fires in 1983 as a trial for the FED/Vic Governments the use of one aircraft did not enable sufficient concentration of effort. During training in Boise Idaho, the aircraft would join a queue of up to ten aircraft stepped up and called in in-turn. Airports in Victoria were restricted due to the operating weights required and the runway pavement strengths (also affected by the usual high temperatures associated with fire weather). I am not sure that RAAF pilots are sitting around doing nothing and waiting for training
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/112x84/36sqn_c130h_tb_016_dcc9ba8855d83728088b08aa2005377f5b3b3d79. jpg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/112x84/36sqn_c130h_tb_048_3f268f873eb28f645c29efc84dd656554fb42ce8. jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/112x84/36sqn_c130h_tb_017_4ec7af6f2abddcf1c029162a1684c316aa544914. jpg
and at least six C130s would be required to achieve the concentration required. In regard to the corrosion that occurred this was despite hosing the tail down each day although the latest versions have the tubes out the para doors.

[Bluedoggy]

Talking to the Navy guys in Tumut the other day. They have the ability to sling buckets. But they don't have any. Can't be an overly expensive purchase to kit out the army/Navy choppers to help out more when necessary?

I can recall that before Military assets are permitted to be called in to water bomb, that ALL contracted civilian assets must be activated and operational. From memory this was part of the agreement with civilian operators to ensure they would get called in for service and not miss a money making opportunity because the government instead used military assets. Many civilian operators relied upon the fire season to earn enough to cover the years overheads.

Made little sense watching a B206 fitted out for corporate work passengers, working with a small Bambi Bucket from NAS Nowra, whilst we had a SK-50 Seaking kitted with a Medium Bambi Bucket capable of holding double the water, and we could only use it on the Jervis Bay Range Facility fires as that was C'wealth ground.

[rattman]

the whole maffs report is avialable online, thing to remember is that US has 8 maffs units and hundreds of C-130 in inventory, 1 maffs was lost in crash. They dont have a lack of planes or aircrew and the ANG is the group that will do maffs operations when required. We dont have excess planes or crews to do this

[Lantern10]

There are a myriad of reasons why Australia is in the situation it is.
This is undoubtedly a large part of it.

The Evidence Brief For A Climate Trials Case Against Abbott, Turnbull, and Morrison - Situation Theatre (http://situationtheatre.com/features-2/climate-election-government-record?fbclid=IwAR311nIh1SkV08zbZi9TwYRYjHHlxjF8dj8iB_UOdl3g clvpZoRVwlqG3TM)

[LostProperty]

It was going OK up to your numbered points. Then I started to wonder if you might also write the same garbage for The Australian?

[Chris2303]

Let me put some facts on the table here.
Aerial fire bombers have and will always be a State Govt. contractual arrangement.

Perhaps that is the problem????

[601]

The CL415 wouldn't work here- we don't have enough open bodies of water for it to scoop, and it is to slow/expensive to use as a land based asset.

Canadair and National Jets produced a study last century dispelling that theory.

Canadair's Firefighting Aircraft QI2 Could It Be Useful In Australia ?

Australian bush fire fighters will not begin to appreciate the support and increased personal safety the SuperScooper will provide until they work a frre with the planes overhead.

Aerial frrefighting for bush fires has largely been confined to fixed-wing agricultural aircraft and helicopters, both of which have an important continuing role to play in the fight against bush fires. These aircraft have some very real advantages, but they also have some very real disadvantages, which include limited payload, ground-based operations and flying weather restrictions.

While the most effective way to utilize the punch of the SuperScooper is by early detection and rapid response - hitting the fire with a massive drop of Class A frre fighting foam to allow fire fighters direct access to the fire - the aircraft will continue to operate effectively when frre intensity and extreme weather have grounded all other aircraft.

The greatest frre threat facing Australia is not amongst the valuable forest plantations scattered around the States, but from the burgeoning urban I bush interface sprawl which was exposed in no uncertain terms during the NSW fires recently. Once the risk was confirmed to the Adelaide Hills, the Dandenong Ranges, and the Blue Mountains, but it has now become apparent that no urban bush land settlement, whether it be in outskirts of Perth or Brisbane, or in Lane Cove, is exempt from the risk of a high intensity and devastatingly fierce bush fire.

Arguments that all aircraft would be grounded during a fire of "Ash Wednesday" intensity are incorrect; extreme weather conditions and high intensity fires are certainly the order of the day, but there are many windows of opportunity during firefighting operations in extreme conditions where the sheer ruggedness of the purpose-built aerial fire fighter enables it to fly and fight. Fire fighters on the ground do not all go home just because the fire intensity is beyond 3OOOkW/m where it is assumed ground forces are ineffective. During the Ash Wednesday frres in South Australia in 1983, Canadair aircraft could have been flying almost continuously- after all, Rescue 1, the State Rescue Helicopter, a Bell205, flew around the Adelaide Hills throughout the worst periods.
In any event the fundamental purpose of the SuperScooper is to put out bush fires before they rage out of controL One of the biggest criticisms of the aircraft is the supposed lack of water sources suitable for scooping. The fact is that there is more scoopable water adjacent to high risk areas (see attached maps) than the detractors would have you believe. In many, many cases, a quick survey of your fire district will indicate that scooping water is available.

The combined national firefighting forces which responded to the New South Wales fires could have been very effectively supported by Canadair aircraft. For example, the fire which almost destroyed Winmalee in the Blue Mountains could have been controlled two days before the fire reached the urban area. Scooping from the Nepean river, and with a flying distance of23 kilometers to Mt. Wilson,

2 CL-215's could have dropped at least 188,000 liters of firefighting foam on the fire before nightfall on Thursday, leaving fire crews to trek in to the fire site the next morning to black out the fire completely. Instead, nearly three days passed, with a very risky backburn conducted, before the frre hit Winmalee with terrifying force.

To the north, in the Banyabba Nature Reserve, Bush Fire units had to drive for four hours before reaching the fire front whereas two CL-215's could have dropped a conservative 288,000 liters of fire fighting foam per day on the fire.
Firefighting in urban fringe areas and in national parks frequently means that fire fighters cannot attack the fire front with safety because it is located in dangerously inaccessible terrain. They are forced to light backburns, which are a big risk in themselves, or wait until it reaches roads and tracks, at which time the intensity is well beyond the ability of ground forces to control. The advantage of initial attack is lost because of the inability to access the frre, and frre fighters watch in frustration and growing fear as the frre approaches homes and threatens lives. It is in these circumstances that the SuperScooper can provide its greatest support; rapid attack with huge quantities of fire suppressant long before the fire threatens lives and properties, enabling fire fighters to extinguish the frre without extreme personal risk.

[Wunwing]

Here is a solution to funding the aircraft. All new coal mines must contribute to the funding to a total of all that we need?????
Wunwing

[Fwh]

What using aircraft for high speed fire suppression.
could that be more effective than water bombing ?

[Sholayo]

Here is a solution to funding the aircraft. All new coal mines must contribute to the funding to a total of all that we need?????
Wunwing

Along with cafe's and fast food chains.

&

[Capn Bloggs]

Here is a solution to funding the aircraft. All new coal mines must contribute to the funding to a total of all that we need?????
How about we open a new export coal mine to pay for the new aeros? There'd be money to spare...

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Particularly if dey was 'coal fired'...…….

"More steam Blue".....

[trashie]

There are a myriad of reasons why Australia is in the situation it is.
This is undoubtedly a large part of it.

The Evidence Brief For A Climate Trials Case Against Abbott, Turnbull, and Morrison - Situation Theatre (http://situationtheatre.com/features-2/climate-election-government-record?fbclid=IwAR311nIh1SkV08zbZi9TwYRYjHHlxjF8dj8iB_UOdl3g clvpZoRVwlqG3TM)
another climate change zealot rather than a rational response to the current situation

[junior.VH-LFA]

Would it not be good to provide our Military pilots with flying hours doing firefighting work rather than just parking them or flying non critical missions to stay current?

regards
fog

I'm not sure where or how this assumption keeps cropping up in Air Tanker discussions that military crew are just waiting around not flying with spare time to master an entirely new role. In the decade I've been in, I haven't seen military aviation busier than it is now, and that was before Operation Bushfire Assist started. It is just simply not true that the military have the people available to do this, or the aircraft (currently at least). It would be much better suited to a civilian agency with the actual expertise to do the work, not just a slapped together currency to tick off once every 3 months.

[Fris B. Fairing]

Torres.
Its already been done.
Check our VH-NEP?
Neptune Tanker VH-NEP (www.adastron.com/lockheed/neptune/vh-nep.htm)

[finestkind]

Of interest from the 1939 Royal Commission into the VIC Bushfires. The Condition of the Forests.— When the early settlers came to what is now this State, they found for the greater part a clean forest. Apparently for many years before their arrival, the forest had not been scourged by fire. They were in their natural state.

Their canopies had prevented the growth of scrub and bracken to any wide extent. They were open and traversible by men, beasts and wagons. Compared with their present condition, they were safe. But the white men introduce fire to the forests.

They burned the floor to promote the growth of grass and to clear it of scrub which had grown where, for whatever reason, the balance of nature had broken down. The fire stimulated grass growth, but it encouraged scrub growth far more.

Thus was begun the cycle of destruction which can not be arrested in our day. The scrub grew and flourished, fire was used to clear it, the scrub grew faster and thicker, bush fires, caused by the careless or designing hand of man, ravaged the forests; the canopy was impaired, more scrub grew and prospered, and again the cleansing agent, fire, was used.

And so to*day, in places where our forefathers rode, driving their herds and flocks before them, the wombat and wallaby are hard put to it to find passage through the bush.

I say of interest as I also believed in reduction burns

[Wizofoz]

You're certainly living on a different planet than I, as just 3 days ago 2 teenagers here were caught lighting fires in the scrub in the suburbs south of the runway.

I nice dodge with an irrelevant "fact" . The claim being pushed by the likes of Andrew Bolt and parroted by you is that we don't have to worry about climate change because all the fires were deliberately lit.

Firstly, that's ridiculous logic as it doesn't matter how they start, the drought/heat/fuel allows them to become catastrophic.

But then there's your lame attempt to re-habilitate your position with "evidence"- did the fire these two teenagers started become a catastrophic fire-storm killing people and destroying property? No? Not really what we're talking about then, is it?

[Wizofoz]

another climate change zealot rather than a rational response to the current situation

No, a rational examination as to why we're IN our current situation, and how to stop it getting worse.

[Jabberwocky82]

Most of the back burning that was delayed/not performed at the beginning to this fire season was a result of the EPA not allowing them to go ahead due to potential smoke levels across Sydney. The models that were used are actually really well done and accurate, but it was the crew of ‘easily offended through social media’ that stopped back burns - not the greenies. None the less, plenty still went ahead.

National Parks has not got control over our back burns. It’s is all controlled ultimately by the RFS. The RFS support them and provide great numbers, but this also means mostly the window of opportunity will fall on a weekend when numbers are available and thus we have less options to complete the burn with weather windows. None the less, plenty still went ahead.

The bush is dry. Really, really dry. As has been detailed above, back burned areas at best this year have slowed, but have certainly not stopped fire spread. Burns have gone back through burnt areas etc and the most difficult part of all of this is that the whole tree has been igniting and burning very quickly - aiding spread.

Parks staff fire fight, in the bush, every year. They leave the roads and go very remote to contain things - usually before they become what we have seen this season. They do this every year. RFS wait down fire trails and back burn off of then. They need a more aggressive stance to fight fire in my opinion.

The RFS volunteers have done an amazing job, and should be held in very high regard as some of them are absolute heroes. We get paid to enter the fire ground, to do what they do for free and community spirit is a very commendable act.

Please don’t fly your private helicopter near the fire ground.

Seasonal tanker leasing is the way to go. Tankers do not put out fires. They can be used way more efficiently then they have been this year but a lot of lessons have been learned.

The armchair experts across the whole board of arguments in the community at the moment should go and volunteer to their local brigade, then they can earn an opinion on this stuff.

Please don’t donate to the RFS, they have a heap of red tape and bureaucracy that means you are essentially donating to the government.

Go and spend your money in affected areas, donate to wildlife rescues and most importantly, don’t forget those struggling with the drought - the cause of this season.

Ten bucks on Shane Fitz earning Australian of the Year in the year to come. Probably rightly so. A lot of the close to him deadweight deserve nothing of the sort.

These fires were massive. Occasionally **** happens and we are not prepared for next level events. This is one of those seasons unfortunately.

[Wizofoz]

Canadair and National Jets produced a study last century dispelling that theory.

Thanks- interesting.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Aerial firefighting aircraft do not put out fires. They support suppression/containment lines to an extent. They're very expensive to operate, and, except for trials continuing in Victoria - do not operate at night, where they would be more valuable.

It would be cost-prohibitive to purchase large tanker aircraft. And the time between dump, return, refill and return is significant. They would be unutilised. These aircraft rotate around the world during northern and southern summers to fight global fire campaigns.

In some instances - aircraft are sent only to pacify community against actual fire suppression value. The best methods are the rapal guys that jump out of helicopters and do controlled burning. They're highly effective.

[SnowFella]

Canadair and National Jets produced a study last century dispelling that theory.

Reading that bit and living right near the Nepean in Penrith I'd be very interested in where they think scooping water could be done, 90% upstream from Penrith has the river running through a narrow winding gorge and downstream from the Penrith weir it's rather damn shallow! Especially in a drought like we are having right now, flow downstream of the weir is near nil.
Sure you might be able to squeeze one down between the M4 bridge and the Victoria bridge, near 3 km stretch of wide enough river between the bridges...with a few lots of power lines going across.

[Sunfish]

Wilson has a set of power lines that have already killed aviators, plus you would need to enforce a no boating zone to make space. Same with lake nihlacootie.

Exits to both in the event of engine failure would be problematic, as would low level turbulence in northerlies.

[SnowFella]

Just looking at google maps the stretch between power lines (with no markers on them) and the new tall foot bridge would be somewhere around 1600m, add 100m to the old Victoria bridge if we are to go back to that claim from a decade ago.
Claims I can find online mention around 1400m for a CL415 to get from 15m, scoop and get back to 15m...be one sporty pilot near kissing the wires on the way down just to see a 30 odd meter tall bridge structure coming up rather fast through the window!

[chute packer]

https://volunteerfirefighters.org.au/water-bombing-and... (https://volunteerfirefighters.org.au/water-bombing-and-magic-bullets?fbclid=IwAR09gsu25EL96z2INz5QDlFN-5EF4ltLLCsxAdFQ7JijqOQdWwo_I-nxMC4)

In particular this part.
"My frustration over all this is made more acute by re-reading the analysis of the trials of the DC10 VLAT by the CSIRO. After a number of water dropping trials, the CSIRO concluded:

Most of the drops featured a distinct pattern of break-up of the drop cloud in which a series of alternating thick and thin sections could be seen. The resulting drop footprints exhibited a corresponding pattern of heavy and light sections of coverage. Many of the light-coverage sections within the footprints were observed to allow the fire to pass across them with minimal slowing of spread rates.
Two drops delivered in open woodlands (as opposed to heavy forest) penetrated through the canopy and provided a good coverage of surface fuels. One of these drops rained gently through the canopy under the influence of a headwind. Another drop caused severe damage, snapping off trees …This drop could have potentially injured people or damaged buildings …
The CSIRO scientists also looked at the effectiveness of the DC10 dropping fire-retardant chemicals in the forest across the path of the headfire, a technique frequently recommended by supporters of aerial tankers. They concluded that this approach would only succeed for very low intensity fires, due to the ease with which a more intense fire would “spot” over the retardant line.

Overall, the CSIRO’s conclusion of this study was that:

…on the evidence collected, this aircraft is not suitable for achieving effective [bushfire] suppression under most Australian conditions. "

[Asturias56]

"aircraft are sent only to pacify community against actual fire suppression value."

shows that someone is trying to help - but tough to tell people it makes little difference cp the PBI on the ground

[Chocks Away]

I nice dodge with an irrelevant "fact" . The claim being pushed by the likes of Andrew Bolt and parroted by you is that we don't have to worry about climate change because all the fires were deliberately lit.... Wizofoz... mate... I never said such a thing and you know it so don't go trying to put words into my mouth!

The climate has always been changing and to think we have such a major hand in it is sheer stupidity!
Three volcanos are chuffing away North of Australia right now with a total of thirteen active today... bushfires' CO2 in comparison... meh! :ugh:

It's very simple but astounds so many. What Bolt; Credlin; The IPA; Reuter; AAP etc have questioned and pointed out (but NOT the climate change weeping zealots of Ch10 / ABC / SBS / CNN / DW / TwitterSewer etc) is that it's CAUSE & EFFECT... if there were no deliberately lit sparks there would not be so many fires AND if there wasn't so much un-attended to undergrowth / fuel, they would not be so intense. Is that so hard to comprehend?
The facts are clear just as per the example I mentioned as an immediate example that day, of idiots lighting the fires!

Happy Landings:ok:

[PPRuNeUser0198]

shows that someone is trying to help - but tough to tell people it makes little difference cp the PBI on the ground

That is the unfortunate part. People believe the aircraft are making a difference. Gives them some 'comfort'. The reality is different. There are other, more, effective means of fire response than bombers. The minute they're not sent - the community would be in an uproar. You don't win elections that way.

Aerial firefighting can improve the chances of a first attack on a bushfire being successful by up to 50%, but it must happen within 30 minutes of ignition to have any prospect of working.

There are costs to have the aircraft on stand by each day (sitting around) - then costs to operate. Just in Victoria, the cost is north of $20m, and operating costs north of $15m each fire season. So ~$30-40m PA spent. A lot of cash for not a lot of return.

Victoria has some 50 aircraft on stand-by for the fire season period and up to 100 additional aircraft nationally.

[Asturias56]

Chocks - there is indeed a long term climate effect and it's not positive for Australia (but quite good if you live in say Murmansk). In geological time its only yesterday that glaciers almost reached Central London for example.

What is also a fact is that the rate of change has increased dramatically since 1700 - and tracks the onset of the Industrial Revolution and the growth of people and industry.

The greens think we can stop CC - I don't think so - but we may be able to SLOW the rate of change

[601]

Just looking at google maps the stretch between power lines (with no markers on them) and the new tall foot bridge would be somewhere around 1600m, add 100m to the old Victoria bridge if we are to go back to that claim from a decade ago.
Claims I can find online mention around 1400m for a CL415 to get from 15m, scoop and get back to 15m...be one sporty pilot near kissing the wires on the way down just to see a 30 odd meter tall bridge structure coming up rather fast through the window!

You have to remember that the Canadair study was done 30 years ago. I cannot remember the exact date.

From the same study;
The total distance required from a height of 15m on the approach to 15m during climb out is 1,200m. Water-borne distance is 564m. Scoops have been made, however, from significantly smaller water areas. Normal speed for scooping is 70kts and scooping time is about 10 seconds. The safe water depth for scooping is less than 2m and excellent water handling characteristics permit the use of narrow bodies of water only 100m wide.

The paper shows what could have been done then, when we had a chance of buying the CL415s.
We blew it back then.

[MJA Chaser]

..... RFS wait down fire trails and back burn off of then. They need a more aggressive stance to fight fire in my opinion.

.
The NSW RFS has RAFT teams who walk in or get dropped in by helio. Certaily the RFS vehilces wait on accessible trails for the fire to arrive.

[Wizofoz]

I nice dodge with an irrelevant "fact" . The claim being pushed by the likes of Andrew Bolt and parroted by you is that we don't have to worry about climate change because all the fires were deliberately lit.... Wizofoz... mate... I never said such a thing and you know it so don't go trying to put words into my mouth!

The climate has always been changing and to think we have such a major hand in it is sheer stupidity!
Three volcanos are chuffing away North of Australia right now with a total of thirteen active today... bushfires' CO2 in comparison... meh! :ugh:

It's very simple but astounds so many. What Bolt; Credlin; The IPA; Reuter; AAP etc have questioned and pointed out (but NOT the climate change weeping zealots of Ch10 / ABC / SBS / CNN / DW / TwitterSewer etc) is that it's CAUSE & EFFECT... if there were no deliberately lit sparks there would not be so many fires AND if there wasn't so much un-attended to undergrowth / fuel, they would not be so intense. Is that so hard to comprehend?
The facts are clear just as per the example I mentioned as an immediate example that day, of idiots lighting the fires!

Happy Landings:ok:

Man made CO2 is 100 times the output of volcanoes. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/Strange Bolt hasn't mentioned that, don't you think?

So, if you are happy to believe that the output of CO2 by volcanoes effects the climate, you MUST believe that man-made CO2 is worse, musn't you?

Now, what evidence do you have that ANY of the catastrophic fire were deliberately lit? And were we not in drought, would it matter? Idiots can't light fires if there is no dry foliage to lite- even a denier can't deny that- but probably will anyway.

[turbidus]

ummmm..currently..ALL of the fires in Oz were deliberately set. The Police are rounding them up as we speak...

There have been several volunteer firefighters arrested for setting fires just to get more work as paid.Police in Australia accuse 24 of deliberately setting bushfires amid natural factorshttps://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/07/australia/australia-fires-police-action-trnd/index.html

[morno]

Most of the larger bushfires this season have been the result of dry lightning

[Wizofoz]

ummmm..currently..ALL of the fires in Oz were deliberately set. The Police are rounding them up as we speak...

There have been several volunteer firefighters arrested for setting fires just to get more work as paid.Police in Australia accuse 24 of deliberately setting bushfires amid natural factorshttps://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/07/australia/australia-fires-police-action-trnd/index.html

That isn't even close to what that says.

[Jabberwocky82]

The NSW RFS has RAFT teams who walk in or get dropped in by helio. Certaily the RFS vehilces wait on accessible trails for the fire to arrive.
They do yes. And so does Parks in much bigger numbers, but I was referring to the ground based stuff which I didn’t really point out.

[currawong]

"Now, what evidence do you have that ANY of the catastrophic fire were deliberately lit? "

Well there is this, from before much of the current hype.

"About 85 per cent are related to human activity, 13 per cent confirmed arson and 37 per cent suspected arson," he said.

"The remainder are usually due to reckless fire lighting or even just children playing with fire."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-22/bushfire-arson-warning-ahead-of-school-holidays/11528192

[Wizofoz]

"Now, what evidence do you have that ANY of the catastrophic fire were deliberately lit? "

Well there is this, from before much of the current hype.

"About 85 per cent are related to human activity, 13 per cent confirmed arson and 37 per cent suspected arson," he said.

"The remainder are usually due to reckless fire lighting or even just children playing with fire."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-22/bushfire-arson-warning-ahead-of-school-holidays/11528192

And I'm fully prepared to believe that may be so. It's also NOT what Chocks was pushing- that we wouldn't have a problem if we just somehow made arson not happen, and is also completely irrelevant. We had arsonists in years we had no major bushfires- because we didn't have the CONDITIONS that lead to fires, arsonists or not.

[Wizofoz]

One of the best summaries you'll see- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0x46-enxsA

[currawong]

Nice, but look carefully and one sees he is doing what he is accusing of others.

For example, NSW figures are quoted to counter national figures. (12:34)

It goes on to ignore both QLD and TAS, the former has an additional 109 before the courts, though it does not distinguish between arson/deliberate.

Here is the "non-Murdoch" source -

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/is-arson-mostly-to-blame-for-the-bushfire-crisis/11865724

There is some good advice regarding graphs - I guarantee most people think they are looking at a temperature graph when they are in fact looking at a "temperature anomaly graph".

As for BOM figures? Well, when I went hunting for figures for a known heat wave where I live (within the BOM supplied/standardised equipment period) it had this to say -

" Data from 1910 and 1911 are not consistent with other sites in the region and are not used". So, no info.

I agree with the fire chief when he says hazard reduction will not stop spread. It does decrease intensity, but this is not stated.

As for environmental interference? My post # 30 refers, again, non- Murdoch source. But, that is only one example, there may be no others.

I can see your point of view, however, there are other points of view with merit.

[machtuk]

The simple answer to the original question is...we can't afford it! Every time we have these fires the water bomber buying saga gets trotted out, ain't gunna happen, remember this is Australia, a nation NOT known to be efficient or smart at just about anything we do!

[601]

There are costs to have the aircraft on stand by each day (sitting around) - then costs to operate. Just in Victoria, the cost is north of $20m, and operating costs north of $15m each fire season. So ~$30-40m PA spent. A lot of cash for not a lot of return.

To quote one politician;

"What is the cost of doing nothing?"

So $30-40m that may reduce the severity or prevent fires is a small price to pay.

If the States, or the Commonwealth, were to purchase the CL515, they are multi-role aircraft and could carry out SAR operations. At present we do not have an aircraft within our SAR capabilities of landing on water for rescue purposes.
CL-515 (https://aerialfirefighter.vikingair.com/aircraft/viking-canadair-515)

[AerialPerspective]

There is a big fleet (I believe 14) of water bombers sitting idle at my home airport (CYQB), and there is talk here of finding some kind of deal with Australia to lease some of them out during our winter here - similar to what is already in place with California.

This would certainly more be cost effective and win-win in terms of utilisation. Fire season here is April to October.

And if that is viable then why not the government purchasing say, 3 of the soon to be retired Qantas 747-438ERs and doing the same in reverse. Operating/owning them here and leasing them out to California and others during our Winter??? The long range of the aircraft would certainly provide no problems carrying firefighters as well between Australia and the US and v.v.

[havick]

And if that is viable then why not the government purchasing say, 3 of the soon to be retired Qantas 747-438ERs and doing the same in reverse. Operating/owning them here and leasing them out to California and others during our Winter??? The long range of the aircraft would certainly provide no problems carrying firefighters as well between Australia and the US and v.v.

There’s probably much better airframes sitting in the desert than clapped out QF airframes.

Also to fly them in the USA on any forestry contract or anything dept. of state, the aircraft can’t have any local EO’s they all have to be standard with STC’s.

That’s why you see a lot of N reg helicopters in Australia but not the other way.

[Global Aviator]

How about Clive’s MD’s...

I see an 83 arriving in Oz currently.

:)

[AerialPerspective]

There’s probably much better airframes sitting in the desert than clapped out QF airframes.

Also to fly them in the USA on any forestry contract or anything dept. of state, the aircraft can’t have any local EO’s they all have to be standard with STC’s.

That’s why you see a lot of N reg helicopters in Australia but not the other way.

Well, at about 15 years old they're hardly 'clapped out' but I get what you're saying, there are likely airframes in the desert that have fewer hours or cycles.

[markis10]

I'm not sure where or how this assumption keeps cropping up in Air Tanker discussions that military crew are just waiting around not flying with spare time to master an entirely new role. In the decade I've been in, I haven't seen military aviation busier than it is now, and that was before Operation Bushfire Assist started. It is just simply not true that the military have the people available to do this, or the aircraft (currently at least). It would be much better suited to a civilian agency with the actual expertise to do the work, not just a slapped together currency to tick off once every 3 months.

Good post. Lots of calls for re purposing C130s that are idle, when reality suggests they are anything but idle. In fact the RAAF have asked for help from the JDF with two hercs arriving last week! So much for idle aircraft. And lets not forget the C17 and KC30 missions this week and the next 4 weeks to help the private organisations get the retardant in country thats needed in the form of airlifts (as well as bringing in DC10 spares).
Water bombers are impressive in flight, serve a political purpose of being highly visible but in practice are expensive and not a magic pill for putting fires out. It will be interesting to see how they go with the extra assets and hopefully an increase in ground crews to service them, its been interesting to watch LATS and VLATS hit the south coast firegrounds while staging out of Richmond despite having Canberra not far away, especially in the context of a VLAT drop only being effective in containment for 15 minutes according to the CSIRO study.

[Jabberwocky82]

The only retardant line I saw myself that held so far this season was one that had helicopters bucketing it straight away after the drop. Everything else hasn’t held much at all. There’s been a lot of money painted around the plCe that’s for sure.

[thorn bird]

Read a recent paper on water bombing in Europe, with videos of the Russian scooper and the Canadian aircraft.
They seemed quite effective especially when used to hit fires before they become too ferocious. When used in a continuous loop with three or four aircraft attacking one behind the other they were very effective, especially in hard to get at places.
Rather interesting they used a lot of sea water, wonder what effect that has on the ecology.

[rattman]

Good post. Lots of calls for re purposing C130s that are idle, when reality suggests they are anything but idle.

Yep thats the point I have tried to make a few times, the US has 8 hercs from the ANG allocated and trained for MAFFS operations, they have over 2K c-130's.

[Asturias56]

Yep thats the point I have tried to make a few times, the US has 8 hercs from the ANG allocated and trained for MAFFS operations, they have over 2K c-130's.

no - they bought 2000 over 60 years - they only operate about 100

What Air Force's Around the World Use the C-130 Hercules Aircraft? - C&S Propeller (http://cspropeller.com/2016/08/31/c-130-hercules-aircraft/)

[rattman]

no - they bought 2000 over 60 years - they only operate about 100

What Air Force's Around the World Use the C-130 Hercules Aircraft? - C&S Propeller (http://cspropeller.com/2016/08/31/c-130-hercules-aircraft/)

Gah mistyped didn't mean 2000 meant 200, they have 145 in USAF, 181 in ANG, 108 in reserve a vaiety of models some that will be unable to be cargo. So I took a guesemate at 200 suitable for cargo / maffs


Also doesn't include marines and coast gaurd aircraft

[witwiw]

Rather interesting they used a lot of sea water, wonder what effect that has on the ecology

I witnessed the aftermath of the 2015 Christmas bushfires in and around Wye River in the Otways.
The helos were bucketing sea water to the hotspots less than five minutes away compared to major fresh water supplies almost 30 minutes away. I understand and accept sea water has a potential detrimental effect on the environment (depending on the quantity, of course) but so do bushfires - I know what I'd rather (sea water or uncontained bushfire) and from which the environment probably recovers soonest.

[FullOppositeRudder]

Rather interesting they used a lot of sea water, wonder what effect that has on the ecology.

I've often wondered about that. Sea water has (to my recollection) never been used on "mainland" South Australia. I also don't know that sea water was used at all in either the air or ground attack on the current Kangaroo Island event and I rather doubt that it was.

Now that I've started, may I mention that I've read this thread with considerable interest, because these days after 50 years as a volunteer CFS member, my age now precludes me from going out on a ground appliance - unless it's a very benign incident; however I'm still active and current on air base operation. I'm also party to some of the thinking behind current strategy, both in terms of what equipment (aircraft) we have, and how we use them. I think we have the policies and equipment mix right for our particular combination of circumstances here in the "driest state". Suffice to say that our fleet of AT-802 SEATs and associated observer rotary and fixed wing aircraft* work well for us most of the time. Having LATs at the ready would not (IMHO) have really prevented the rapid forward spread (to any useful degree) at the two major events which put us on the front pages for a few days last month, although they may have assisted in the protection of some assets which were destroyed.

* There is one contracted Skycrane in the fleet which get responded when it's involvement is determined to be beneficial, and LATs are occasionally invited in from the eastern states if they are spare, and again perceived to be useful in a given situation. That's about as far as I want to go - if this were in Jet Blast I might venture a little further into reasons, but politics are involved too, so best I stay clear. Thank you all for an interesting read.

[On eyre]

I've often wondered about that. Sea water has (to my recollection) never been used on "mainland" South Australia. I also don't know that sea water was used at all in either the air or ground attack on the current Kangaroo Island event and I rather doubt that it was.

Now that I've started, may I mention that I've read this thread with considerable interest, because these days after 50 years as a volunteer CFS member, my age now precludes me from going out on a ground appliance - unless it's a very benign incident; however I'm still active and current on air base operation. I'm also party to some of the thinking behind current strategy, both in terms of what equipment (aircraft) we have, and how we use them. I think we have the policies and equipment mix right for our particular combination of circumstances here in the "driest state". Suffice to say that our fleet of AT-802 SEATs and associated observer rotary and fixed wing aircraft* work well for us most of the time. Having LATs at the ready would not (IMHO) have really prevented the rapid forward spread (to any useful degree) at the two major events which put us on the front pages for a few days last month, although they may have assisted in the protection of some assets which were destroyed.

* There is one contracted Skycrane in the fleet which get responded when it's involvement is determined to be beneficial, and LATs are occasionally invited in from the eastern states if they are spare, and again perceived to be useful in a given situation. That's about as far as I want to go - if this were in Jet Blast I might venture a little further into reasons, but politics are involved too, so best I stay clear. Thank you all for an interesting read.

Sea water was used by the Skycrane some ten years ago on what was termed the “Proper Bay” fire near Port Lincoln. No lasting effects that I can recall.

[R755]

We have a fleet of well maintained P3 Orions. These are owned outright by the Commonwealth. The US would, no doubt, be happy to relinquish any hold they might have on the basic airframes, once stripped of any role equipment relating to military ops. This is especially so, when one considers the politics.
Selected aircraft could be sent to the states for tanking, using, say, the RADS II, external tank set up. All the engineering has been done. CASA represents a huge risk. Therefore, the aircraft will have to switch to N reg.
To achieve best operational flexibility, the aircraft will need to be operated privately. This could be financed, by local operators, against long duration contracts to governments.
The L188/P3 offers 12,000 - 13,000 litre capacity, fast ferry speeds (jet speed), more airstrip options, a great climb and beaut slow speed behavior and capability on the drop run, and with a good drop pattern.

Then again, we could just scrap them......

[Asturias56]

he C130s are used for rescue missions, for training, logistics operations, refuelers, special ops and a few others. Here is the breakdown:

United States Air Force operates 54
The United States Air National Guard has 26
The United States Coast Guard flies 6
The United States Marine Corps also has 6
And finally the United States Navy flies 8

[rattman]

Dunno where you are getting your figures from but I am getting them from the actual USAF. USAF itself says it has 450 hercs, they grounded a 1/3 of the fleet last year (123) when a cracking problem was found in the J's

Air Mobility Command head Gen. Maryanna Miller ordered (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/08/08/air-force-pauses-flight-ops-for-more-than-a-hundred-c-130s-after-atypical-cracking-found/) 123 of the 450 Total Force C-130 Hercules aircraft to undergo inspection after cracking was found on the lower center wing joint, also known as the "rainbow fitting," of one of the planes. The Air Force observed that the crack could lead to the dismantling of the wing from the aircraft, leading to the partial removal of C-130H and C-130J aircraft from the sky.

[rattman]

We have a fleet of well maintained P3 Orions. These are owned outright by the Commonwealth. The US would, no doubt, be happy to relinquish any hold they might have on the basic airframes, once stripped of any role equipment relating to military ops. This is especially so, when one considers the politics.
S..

Actually a good suggestion they exist already as full time tankers, some have been sent to museums but 6 are still flying

[Sunfish]

I’m told sea water has no lasting ill effects.

The trouble with all this “lets convert Xyz” stuff is that it’s not as easy as it sounds. .....And of course forget about doing any of it in Australia.

‘As for Orion’s, if RAAF history is anything to go by, they will put a match to them before they allow them to be converted.

[Jabberwocky82]

The only retardant line I saw myself that held so far this season was one that had helicopters bucketing it straight away after the drop. Everything else hasn’t held much at all. There’s been a lot of money painted around the place that’s for sure.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/retard_b49785bde8f91087d5fc23285faedc12167886f5.jpg

[thorn bird]

If sea water on a fire is not an issue, however no doubt the greenies would make it one, but given we have a vast coastline stretching very close to the areas in which wild fires are prevalent, would that not make a case for the Russian Be 200 amphib?

It can scoop up 12 tonnes of water in 14 seconds, carry up to 40 passengers, cruises at 300 kts and has a ferry range of 1800 nm. It can operate off a 1.5 meter sea state, 2.5 meters deep.

It is also capable of being configured for other tasks such as search and rescue, marine surveillance or as a freighter.

A series of boat ramps in our more sheltered bays, or expansion of existing ones could provide forward bases for refuelling and servicing.

[morno]

Yeah, cause buying anything Russian has always been a great idea..... :bored:

[Wunwing]

The Orions from the old Aero Union fleet are now being operated by Airstrike and possibly one by Buffalo. The FAA approved design exists and has for a number of years. Their grounding had nothing to do with their lack of airworthiness,Purely business deal. Note that Canada's Airspray, Buffalo and Conair have operated the L!88 as air tankers for number of years. All up about 16-20 L188s and Orions are current so the aircraft must have a few supporters?
However looking at the current conversions most of those operators are heading towards Bae 146 types.and away from Electras.

If the Federal govt decided to go that way it has nothing to do with the RAAF as they will be disposed off via Defense Supply and probably converted in the Airstrike facility in the US?.

Wunwing

[Fris B. Fairing]

We have a fleet of well maintained P3 Orions. These are owned outright by the Commonwealth.

Sorry, which Commonwealth are you talking about? If it's Australia there are only two P-3s still in RAAF service. Additionally there is one flying with HARS and 8 permanently static aeroplanes in various museums.

[rattman]

Sorry, which Commonwealth are you talking about? If it's Australia there are only two P-3s still in RAAF service. Additionally there is one flying with HARS and 8 permanently static aeroplanes in various museums.

also 5 flew out to the US in mid 2018, owned now by MHD rockland and sitting in florida, plane trackig has no flights on record for them since arriving in the US
http://warnesysworld.com/us-companies-plan-military-orion-aircrew-training-ex-raaf-ap-3cs/

[Wunwing]

I'm not proposing the Orion but it may be a remote possibility. As I understand the museum aircraft they are still only on loan from the RAAF. Loans can be recalled?
My point is that an FAA certified dump system exists and is in use for both Orions and L188s.

Looking at the current L188 operators, they are moving to the Bae 146 aircraft and that seems to be the way to go,given hull availability and local experienced operators.

Wunwing

[Fris B. Fairing]

As I understand the museum aircraft they are still only on loan from the RAAF. Loans can be recalled?


The Australian museum Orions are not on loan. Ownership was transferred to the recipient organisations with some cost recovery involved.

[Spanners and lockwir]

I think a major issue is most people think the RFS/CFA are "supplemented" with volunteers that fire fight.

The "firefighters" are the volunteers in the rural areas.

Urban firefighters get paid and work for Fire and Rescue and are responsible for fires in their boundaries. The similarity could be Fire and Rescue NSW and the airport fire service at Sydney airport, they are two completely separate things, but when things go bad they can support each other with "excess" resources but each must maintain it's minimum level of service to it's primary role. So the RFS does get some limited support during the fires but must maintain X resources to protect it's defined area and response times, leaving the RFS mostly using volunteers.

My personal opinion is RFS should have full time front line staff (equal to the number of police in that area as a start) and they are supplemented with volunteers.

As far as aircraft match the Canadian fleet and share them over the two seasons staggering if needed.
Not sure which 'most people' think that..

Fire Rescue NSW has a mix of career and 'retained' (paid part time) staff.

NSW Parks also has full time and paid seasonal staff.

If there's a need for more paid firefighters then placing them in agencies that do currently employ them rather than fundamentally restructuring the RFS. You haven't explained why you think it's a necessary measure.

[Spanners and lockwir]

Most of the back burning that was delayed/not performed at the beginning to this fire season was a result of the EPA not allowing them to go ahead due to potential smoke levels across Sydney. The models that were used are actually really well done and accurate, but it was the crew of ‘easily offended through social media’ that stopped back burns - not the greenies. None the less, plenty still went ahead.

National Parks has not got control over our back burns. It’s is all controlled ultimately by the RFS. The RFS support them and provide great numbers, but this also means mostly the window of opportunity will fall on a weekend when numbers are available and thus we have less options to complete the burn with weather windows. None the less, plenty still went ahead.

The bush is dry. Really, really dry. As has been detailed above, back burned areas at best this year have slowed, but have certainly not stopped fire spread. Burns have gone back through burnt areas etc and the most difficult part of all of this is that the whole tree has been igniting and burning very quickly - aiding spread.

Parks staff fire fight, in the bush, every year. They leave the roads and go very remote to contain things - usually before they become what we have seen this season. They do this every year. RFS wait down fire trails and back burn off of then. They need a more aggressive stance to fight fire in my opinion.

The RFS volunteers have done an amazing job, and should be held in very high regard as some of them are absolute heroes. We get paid to enter the fire ground, to do what they do for free and community spirit is a very commendable act.

Please don’t fly your private helicopter near the fire ground.

Seasonal tanker leasing is the way to go. Tankers do not put out fires. They can be used way more efficiently then they have been this year but a lot of lessons have been learned.

The armchair experts across the whole board of arguments in the community at the moment should go and volunteer to their local brigade, then they can earn an opinion on this stuff.

Please don’t donate to the RFS, they have a heap of red tape and bureaucracy that means you are essentially donating to the government.

Go and spend your money in affected areas, donate to wildlife rescues and most importantly, don’t forget those struggling with the drought - the cause of this season.

Ten bucks on Shane Fitz earning Australian of the Year in the year to come. Probably rightly so. A lot of the close to him deadweight deserve nothing of the sort.

These fires were massive. Occasionally **** happens and we are not prepared for next level events. This is one of those seasons unfortunately.
You might want to brush up on the difference between back burning and planned hazard reduction burning.

Donations to the RFS are recieved by a trust fund with strict limits to how such funds can be spent and robust governance. Essentially the funds must be spent on items for volunteer use that would not otherwise be provided. Bizarre that you're patting them on the back while urging us not to acknowledge those efforts with a donation.

The RFS is a government agency..

Hopefully everyone will ignore your plea.

[Spanners and lockwir]

I can recall that before Military assets are permitted to be called in to water bomb, that ALL contracted civilian assets must be activated and operational. From memory this was part of the agreement with civilian operators to ensure they would get called in for service and not miss a money making opportunity because the government instead used military assets. Many civilian operators relied upon the fire season to earn enough to cover the years overheads.

Made little sense watching a B206 fitted out for corporate work passengers, working with a small Bambi Bucket from NAS Nowra, whilst we had a SK-50 Seaking kitted with a Medium Bambi Bucket capable of holding double the water, and we could only use it on the Jervis Bay Range Facility fires as that was C'wealth ground.

If the B206 is flown by a typical Helitack pilot (years of experience) they'll be far more effective than an ADF crew that's only had occasional part time hours in the role.

[Prolapsed Annulus]

I read this thread with interest. Great contributions.

Big Picture, Australia is subject to three global patterns that affect our weather, each with three phases: positive, neutral and negative:
- The El Nino Southern Oscillation, which in a negative phase causes drier weather in northern and eastern Australia. Oscillations from neutral are becoming more extreme and more frequent over time.
- The Indian Ocean Dipole, which in a positive phase causes drier weather in northwestern Australia. Conversely a negative IOD causes increased rainfall in the northwest, which is occasionally channeled south and southeast by subtropical troughs. Last year saw an extreme positive IOD, which has only recently ended. Incidentally positive and negative divergences from neutral are also becoming more extreme over time.
- The Southern Annular Mode, which in a positive phase draws the Roaring Forties and Furious Fifties winds further south, carrying rainbearing cold fronts away from southern Australia for weeks or months; but depending on season and ENSO, may conversely cause increased rainfall in eastern Auatralia.
The science and history shows that whenever we have two of these three patterns coinciding, it causes drier weather across large parts of Australia.
This fire season we had a confluence of El Nino for the last few years plus a very positive IOD last year, which has subsequently only recently eased. The result was extremely dry conditions to the extent that soil moisture in parts of southeastern Australia was - and in places still is - zero. The fire season started in southeast QLD in August. The traditional fire season starts in October/November and over time is becoming longer, narrowing the traditional hazard reduction burn window in the cooler months.

A friend recently returned from volunteer work in NT Aboriginal lands with an interesting story to tell. In NT, which incidentally has the largest proportion of Aboriginal land as a percentage of total State/Territory lands, cultural burns aim to burn a quarter of their land p.a. leaving a mosaic pattern of areas of varying fuel load. NT is one of the most lightning struck places on the planet. Fires started by dry lightning will only run as far as the most recently burned area, and when the wind eases overnight, they die out due to a lack of fuel and a lack of wind impetus. NT Aboriginal lands don't have volunteer fire brigades. They don't need them.

There is also the testimony of the first Europeans to explore inland southeast Australia, who described open woodland with fresh green fodder beneath and blackened tree trunks just about everywhere, as evidence of frequent low intensity cultural mosaic burning.They also described nomadic indigenous Australians burning wherever they wandered for firestick farming and as an indication of their location to other Aboriginal bands. Even Watkin Tench recorded in his diary of the almost constant smoke from fires observed as the First Fleet proceeded up the east coast to Botany Bay. That was in January 1788. We'll never know if those fires were from dry lightning or wandering Aboriginal bands or both or in what proportion. But in combination with the eyewitness testimony of Aboriginal fire practices by early Europeans, I question the modern idea that burning in summer is a flat-out no-no. What does the science and Aboriginal tradition have to say? Not sure of the science but our local Dharawal elder reckons that cool, low intensity fires clear the fuel loads and undergrowth of woody weeds, fertilise the land with their ash, promote the growth of fodder for native grazing animals, and the heat and smoke actually promotes rain and heavier dew, which suppresses the fires at night.

In 2016 the NSW Govt cut the NPWS and RFS budgets by over one third. NPWS is responsible for conservation and hazard reduction in NSW public lands, of which hazard reduction burns play a part. The budget cuts resulted in about 400 NPWS staff losing their jobs, mostly rangers. Presumably boots on the ground are essential for mapping fuel loads, planning and executing hazard reduction, and remote area fire fighting. The NPWS has a goal of burning 5% of public lands p.a. This they failed to do in 2016 and 2017. Even though the NPWS chief said they devoted ALL manpower to hazard reduction burns and abandoned their other core role of conservation. From memory I think they met their goal in 2018. Not sure of the figures for 2019. So no conservation work in NSW for the best part of 4 years, in a country with one of the highest extinction rates on the planet. But that's another subject.

Similarly, in recent years VIC has also failed to meet their own hazard reduction burn targets, as recommended by royal commission into previous catastrophic bushfires. This failure to hazard reduction burn in NSW and VIC coincided with an El Nino event and drought in southeast Australia over the same timeframe.

Given the experience in NT, and the records of first European explorers, and acknowledging that relatively flat NT savannah and open woodland is not remote mountainous forested southeast Australia, a goal to burn 5% p.a. of public lands is probably an inadequate target. That translates as a rule of thumb to areas being burned once in 20 years. That's a lot of time for hazardous fuel loads to build. And possibly the window of opportunity to burn in the cooler months is too narrow and also needs to be reconsidered.

Incidentally, QLD does not seem to have suffered nearly as badly as NSW and VIC this fire season. I note that QLD incorporates Aboriginal cultural burns into its land management practices, which is notably absent in NSW and VIC.

I also note eyewitness testimony of fires in the NSW/VIC high country, where areas that did not burn had been heavily grazed by brumbies. The brumby herd has quadrupled in recent years. Many are starving, and the herds are causing environmental damage which will only worsen as their numbers are further concentrated in the unburned areas. They need to be culled, both as a humane measure and an environmental one. However it raises an interesting counter-argument to the lockup of public lands preventing graziers from entering. Perhaps grazing could play its part in hazard reduction, in the absence of the estimated billion or more native grazing animals killed in these bushfires.

Additionally, locals in northern NSW forests note the change in forest composition over the last few decades. Poor (too intense) selective logging practices in State forests have resulted in a proliferation of palm trees, which in turn drop highly flammable fronds. These forests don't usually burn and are therefore not adapted to fire, however a combination of drought and fuel loads from palm fronds have set them up for destruction.

A colleague who lives inland of Port Macquarie applied to the local RFS to hazard reduction burn on his property last winter. He was told to fill in a bunch of forms and they'd be able to assist in 18 months. He spent the next 4 months hand-clearing a foot deep layer of fuel from the forest clearing in which his property is located, and the surrounding forest. His efforts saved his house and outbuildings. I heard on the radio one South Coast farmer complain he's still waiting for approval from the relevant NSW Govt department to hazard reduction burn on his own property... three years after appplying. THREE ******* YEARS? He lost his entire property in the recent fires. Anecdotally there's clearly an issue in NSW with bureaucracy and resourcing for hazard reduction.

Former fire chief Greg Mullins stated that State Fire Chiefs were not being honest with their Governments about what they needed right now, because they knew that in a bureaucratic game of get-square, they would have their funding in future years cut by the bureaucracies if they were to ask for more resources and funding now.

As to the role of the Federal Govt:
- A business case to increase funding for the National Aerial Firefighting Centre (which in turn sources aerial firefighting assets nationally and internationally) went nowhere for 18 months. Until of course the Federal Govt suffered harsh criticism for the failure to act, then it gets kicked through in a jiffy.
- The Labor Party at the last election promised $60 million to establish a (presumably Federal) permanent aerial firefighting unit of large air tankers and trained smoke jumpers (firefighters using dry methods to fight newly initiated fires). The Coalition failed to match it.
- The PM refused to meet current and former fire chiefs in March 2019, who sought to warn him of the impending fire season, presumably out of some misguided ideological resistance to any discussion of the role of climate change in natural disaster.
- Around the same time, the fire chiefs requested ADF assistance but were told by the PM words to the effect "The ADF fight wars, not bushfires". They weren't asking the ADF to fight the fires but to provide the many and varied support roles at which they excel. Meanwhile, I've read that the ADF were champing at the bit to assist and have been wargaming catastrophic bushfires.
- Joint Federal-State agency co-operation on bushfire response was cancelled in mid-2018.
- Meetings of Federal heads of department to discuss bushfire and national emergency response were halted.
- Federal department research on bushfires and other national weather / climate change related emergencies was never brought to ministers attention out of fear of funding to the programs being cut.
- The PM went AWOL at the height of a national emergency and his office failed to communicate the delegation of national leadership to the Invisible Man, deputy PM McCormack.
- When the PM finally mobilises the ADF and calls up the Reserves, no-one told the NSW Fire Commissioner. He finds out via the TV news. Then the PM blames the NSW Premier for failing to communicate it, having previously told the public that he was communicating directly with the State Fire Chiefs.

WHAT THE **** HAS AUSTRALIA COME TO?

To paraphrase ABC radio commentator Josh Szeps, if the country had come under attack by a foreign power that killed dozens of people, thousands of livestock and a billion native animals, destroyed hundreds of homes, businesses, farms and other buildings, thousands of km of fencing, and millions of hectares of lands, we would have called on allies to resist the attack, and to assist much sooner. I'd add if our Governments had *******-WELL LISTENED to the warnings we would have been vastly more prepared.

So in summary this fire season we had an extremely dry landscape and high fuel loads. This fire season was always going to be bad. Once the blazes were up and running, nothing was going to stop them. But we had governments manifestly unprepared for a situation that was predicted well in advance, and a landscape just waiting for the right conditions to explode. And those conditions eventuated. But it didn't have to be this way!

So the questions are:
- Would the fires have had the same intensity, causing the fires to crown, resulting in such devastatingly hot fires, with resultant convection producing massive updrafts to carry embers for kilometres and creating pyroCN, in turn igniting more fires; and dragging in their own strong inflows, further fanning the flames, had hazard reduction been far more widespread? I think the answer is no.
- Would they have been so numerous and widespread if we had remote IR sensing provided by satellite and ADF Global Hawks etc; dedicated quick response smoke jumper teams and a full suite of nationally and internationally sourced aerial assets to extinguish remote fires early before they grew to enormous size? I think the answer there is also a resounding no.

Unfortunately with regard to fuel loads, the genie is out of the bottle. We'll just have to wait until cooler months, and we receive widespread rainfall, and adequately research and resource hazard reduction burns in areas of mapped extremely high fuel loads.

From this thread it seems that contrary to my "belief" that LATs and other aerial firefighting assets were very effective, surprisingly the "evidence" is they actually aren't as effective as they look. It sure looks good on the news though. Very dramatic. Great for morale. But more of a niche asset. That said, there seems to be a place for them in a national firefighting system of systems. As northern and southern hemisphere firefighting seasons get longer and overlap, perhaps there's a place for a Federally funded sovereign controlled LAT and VLAT element and smoke jumpers that could either be leased to northern hemisphere countries or utilised in Australia for lighting and controlling widespread hazard reduction burns, and in the rare event of an early bushfire emergency, can be recalled to Australia.

I look forward with hope to the outcome of the recently announced royal commission. Probably misplaced given the almost 60 royal commissions and inquiries in as many years... And still we can't come to terms with fire in our landscape.

[neville_nobody]

A friend recently returned from volunteer work in NT Aboriginal lands with an interesting story to tell. In NT, which incidentally has the largest proportion of Aboriginal land as a percentage of total State/Territory lands, cultural burns aim to burn a quarter of their land p.a. leaving a mosaic pattern of areas of varying fuel load. NT is one of the most lightning struck places on the planet. Fires started by dry lightning will only run as far as the most recently burned area, and when the wind eases overnight, they die out due to a lack of fuel and a lack of wind impetus. NT Aboriginal lands don't have volunteer fire brigades. They don't need them.

There is also the testimony of the first Europeans to explore inland southeast Australia, who described open woodland with fresh green fodder beneath and blackened tree trunks just about everywhere, as evidence of frequent low intensity cultural mosaic burning.They also described nomadic indigenous Australians burning wherever they wandered for firestick farming and as an indication of their location to other Aboriginal bands. Even Watkin Tench recorded in his diary of the almost constant smoke from fires observed as the First Fleet proceeded up the east coast to Botany Bay. That was in January 1788. We'll never know if those fires were from dry lightning or wandering Aboriginal bands or both or in what proportion. But in combination with the eyewitness testimony of Aboriginal fire practices by early Europeans, I question the modern idea that burning in summer is a flat-out no-no. What does the science and Aboriginal tradition have to say? Not sure of the science but our local Dharawal elder reckons that cool, low intensity fires clear the fuel loads and undergrowth of woody weeds, fertilise the land with their ash, promote the growth of fodder for native grazing animals, and the heat and smoke actually promotes rain and heavier dew, which suppresses the fires at night.

Unfortunately with the Greens hysteria over climate change and air pollution is such that widespread burning would never be tolerated anywhere on the east coast. The Greens have made it difficult to do any sort of control burn and the type of burning you are talking about will lead to widespread air pollution problems. You then have unintended consequence of the air pollution. You would have people suing the government for health concerns, loss of income, deaths, transport related delays etc etc etc

There was a case in the NT a long time ago where the smoke was so bad that the Airmed King Air couldn't land due to poor visibility which resulted in the patient's death. Now imagine the hysteria if that happened in Sydney or Melbourne.

Personally I agree with you, control burning is the way to go unfortunately though politics and the short sighted Australian Public won't tolerate it. You might get away with it next year, but in about 5 years time all the bush will have grown back, noone will remember this year's bush fires, local members will get hounded about air pollution and problem will start again.

[dr dre]

Unfortunately with the Greens hysteria over climate change and air pollution is such that widespread burning would never be tolerated anywhere on the east coast. The Greens have made it difficult to do any sort of control burn


That old myth again. It’s a blatant lie and has been debunked by credible people involved with firefighting, from Fire Chiefs down to local volunteer firefighters.

NSW RFS Chief:

Shane Fitzsimmons, the NSW Rural Fire Service commissioner, denied firefighters were restricted by environmental laws.

He explained that the biggest obstacle to controlled burning was the small window of opportunity they have in which to do it.

'We are environmentally conscious and law-abiding, we have streamlined processes.

'But I've got to say, the environmental clearances are invariably not our problem with hazard reduction burning.'

Of all the burns we have ready to go, 70-80% are cleared environmentally, just waiting for the right window of opportunity, and resourcing is a challenge.

RFS Commissioner on hazard reduction burning

NSW Fire and Rescue Station Queanbeyan:

Political parties of any denomination do NOT influence the decisions of organisations like FRNSW, ACT Fire and Rescue, ACT and NSW Rural Fire Services and Parks and Wildlife Services when choosing when and how to do Hazard Reduction burns. It just doesn’t work like that. The main reason Hazard Reduction burns are cancelled or delayed is due to the predicted intensity of the burn exceeding the limits that would make it safe for firefighters, native flora and fauna and obviously you wonderful people.


Fire Brigade Shuts Down Rumour That The Greens Are To Blame For Bushfires (https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-fire-brigade-dispels-the-rumour-that-greens-are-to-blame-for-bushfires-20200105)

Firefighter awarded medal for bravery:

Hazard reduction burns -

No, the Greens haven't been stopping hazard reduction burns from taking place. We still do them and yes we should absolutely do more of them.

Yes, the weather extremes and droughts have significantly reduced the window in which it is safe to perform these burns.

Yes, the state governments need to invest more money in HRB's. NSW for example, as an estimate, would need to increase their budget from $100million to a half billion, a five fold increase and that money needs to come from somewhere


'Outright lies': Firefighter's blunt post about misinformation amid bushfire crisis (https://au.news.yahoo.com/firies-impassioned-post-addressing-the-big-questions-about-fire-crisis-goes-viral-082925883.html)

Greenie from hippie community in northern NSW who is also an RFS volunteer:


Nearly 50 per cent of our able adults are members of the Wytaliba RFS, a figure envied by many other brigades.

Over the last three years, in co-operation with NSW Forestry, National Parks and the RFS, we have had very extensive controlled burning in the state forest and national park on our perimeter. Carol (Greens Glen Innes mayor with 20 year RFS service medal) and I have a large cleared area around our double brick house.

Everything that should be done, was done and lots more.

Wytaliba had been back burning before fatal fire (https://www.gleninnesexaminer.com.au/story/6492701/opinion-we-did-burnoffs-badja-sparks-hits-back/)

[SRFred]

Our problem with HR burns is the RFS have closed the window of opportunity on us by extending the fire seasons.

As for water bombers there seem to be a heap of "new", well very shiney, Air tractors around. Two sitting at Jindabyne the other morning and three with floats at Cooma Airport.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Many will note I have been in favour of high frequency water bombing using the likes of the CL415 and still cannot understand why the penchant for VLATs other than to look good for the nightly news. BUT, I have started to return to the idea that these fires are controlled by huge slow moving bureaucracies where, in the past, fires were managed by local brigades. Hazard reduction burning in local conditions when the weather is right. Anyone ever see a cane paddock lit up? The allotted paddock lit up in less than an hour from start to finish. Spectacular when lit close to evening...Local fire captains used to do the same thing. I have watched them light up a 100acre block straddling a ridge line and have it burn in from three sides and extinguish itself against a manned break. The fire goes off with a quite stunning mushroom cloud..hint! Limited windows available for burning off is BS of the highest order. High pressure systems no longer pass over our landmass? High pressure systems do not subscribe to bureaucratic punctuality! I am not very good at ripping off png pictures from articles but I suggest everyone have a look at the image (https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2020/02/an-academic-theory-fit-for-burning/) on this page. You will see the effects of a wildfire on one side of the photo. Canopy fire so must have been pretty hot. In the middle, a backburn operation from a fire break and untouched forest saved from the fire. This is what fireys used to do with nothing but a piece of burlap bag on a stick and the odd knapsack full of water. Back in the day, they were not scared to put a D9 into the bush to push a two blade wide break (That is over 10m!) across a ridgeline or through unburnt country before the firefront...all the while fire crews were pinching in the sides of the fire to stop it spreading out. My Dad was a kid in 39 up the Rose River. He vividly remembers the lines of men, marching up Dead Horse Gap with nothing but fire rakes, burlap bags and knapsacks. These current fires are being prosecuted so a huge bureaucracy can manage the attack, or lack there of. Evacuations...never heard of before these events...to save human life. Huge armies of firefighters with huge camps set up to rest, replenish and rotate them for a very extended period of time. The worst bit, why are volunteer crews being used way outside of their areas? Surely there are enough crews in the immediate fire zone...or is there something not being told? I have a cousin who is a fire captain in the south east of NSW. He and his crews have quit the RFS because of the inane management. He was told to leave burning houses in his town ship to go up the road and wait for instructions. He lost his own house and sheds, they have now set up their own appliance and are operating outside the control of the RFS. This is one story of many that I have heard about. just that it is a family member involved. Something is rotten within the management of the various fire authorities. My Dad looks at fires around Corowa and frets that things that used to be done are no longer done. So, my mind has turned, before we call in the aerial assets, have we done EVERYTHING possible to reduce the ferocity of these beasts BEFORE they do get going? Remember! To a hammer, every problem is a nail..Big fire bureaucracies need big fires to justify themselves. A fire burning for months must be questioned on the grounds of lack of access, fuel load management, and local knowledge

[601]

That old myth again. It’s a blatant lie and has been debunked by credible people involved with firefighting, from Fire Chiefs down to local volunteer firefighters.

It may not be the Greens Party as they are not in power. But it is a local or a group of locals who has found a green tinged reason to pressure an authority to prevent a fire reduction burn.

[dr dre]

It may not be the Greens Party as they are not in power. But it is a local or a group of locals who has found a green tinged reason to pressure an authority to prevent a fire reduction burn.

If you’d bothered to read the links I posted you’ll see that firefighters from state Fire Chiefs to on the ground firies are neither blaming the Greens politcial party nor “greenies” on local councils nor “greenies” who lobby local councils.

They are blaming a reduced window of opportunity for controlled burns and a lack of funding. They are the experts and they know what the reality is.

[neville_nobody]

That old myth again. It’s a blatant lie and has been debunked by credible people involved with firefighting, from Fire Chiefs down to local volunteer firefighters.

I said they have made it difficult not impossible. I think that is the frustration that is being directed at them.

That aside even if you took the opposite view and burned the National Parks like it was 1788, it would be the general population that would be up in arms about air pollution every year, so it is an unwinnable war for any government.

[dr dre]

I said they have made it difficult not impossible. I think that is the frustration that is being directed at them.


I hate to sound like a broken record but everyone involved with firefighting, from state Fire Chiefs down to local on the ground firies aren’t blaming “greenies” at all, whether you accuse them of making hazard reduction “difficult” or “impossible”.

Like the articles I posted stated those authoritative voices from the firefighting community are blaming a lower window of opportunity to carry out controlled burns and problems with resourcing/funding.

Why do you have such an obsession to place a large proportion or all of the blame for this crisis on “greenies” when all the experts involved in firefighting aren’t blaming them at all? It seems you are more obsessed with point scoring against your politcial enemies rather than listening to what the credible firefighters are saying.

If there’s any frustration being directed at them it’s wrong, and I would hasten to say a deliberate effort at political and media point scoring and deflection away from the real problems firefighters are facing.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

We all know why the Aboriginals burned the land. The first tv pictures of newly introduced controlled burns that resulted in crispy kangaroos, wombats, or koalas and it will stop straight away again.

[currawong]

I'll post it again for the good dr....

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/744x1024/abcgippsland_30c0c0e94b88354bbe7b331af30b9cd5421390a2.jpg

[601]

It seems you are more obsessed with point scoring against your politcial enemies rather than listening to what the credible firefighters are saying.

Maybe the Chiefs need to do what ScoMo is doing. Get out and listen to the people who are affected.
They could start at Nowa Nowa.
We have learned naught from past history.
Let's tell the Burning Truth (https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-tell-the-burning-truth/news-story/ae30e22c69a0a9a7fe4141bc4e9442a8)

[Sunfish]

What prolapse said......

‘’YES IT. IS THE EFFING GREENS.’
’

The laborials are so concerned about green votes that they adopted their environmental policies.

1. Our local council refuses to allow the removal of dead killer trees because they say they are habitat trees for animals, at least until they burn. We have two outside our local fire station and we can’t remove them!


2. State governments are lazy know nothings whose inner city policy staff know SFA about the bush.

Example: Near me is a 23km long dirt road which is dotted with bush camping sites. It receives 90,000 visitors per year. It’s not unusual to have upwards of 5000 campers on a holiday long weekend.

The road is a dead end. The whole area is a fire trap - impossible to defend or attack a fire. Fire trucks will collide with idiots trying to flee if there is a fire. We have pleaded with state and local government to at least seal the road and build NSPs at regular intervals - no result.

3. The academics and officials are telling half truths. Yes, Fuel reduction burns probably don’t help in a catastrophic crowning fire. However you won’t get a catastrophic fire if you have removed most of the fuel in the first place.

4. There is no way you can afford permanent paid rural firefighters to cover any state. Victoria has 35,000 volunteers. Smothering even a small grassfire (400 acres) may take twenty tankers that need to be on scene within minutes.



5. Do the basic maths. The bush is ALWAYS going to burn. You get to choose when if you are lucky. You can choose low intensity fuel reduction burns or catastrophe - your choice.......and **** sydney and melbourne air quality concerns.

To put that in terms a greenie might understand, IF THERE IS NO FUEL ON THE FOREST FLOOR, YOU CANT GET A CATASTROPHIC FIRE!

If we don’t learn this lesson, the next big one is going to leave thousands dead.

[dr dre]

Yeah, an opinion piece by Miranda Devine is really going to convince me the fire chiefs in NSW and Victoria, local fire brigades across NSW and individual firefighters are bunch of idiots who can’t see the “green menace” in front of their eyes...../s

[Sunfish]

The firefighters I was with in NSW were united in their call for more burnings and hatred of the greens agenda.

[601]

Yeah, an opinion piece by Miranda Devine is really going to convince me the fire chiefs in NSW and Victoria, local fire brigades across NSW and inidvidual firefighters are bunch of idiots who can’t see the “green menace” in front of their eyes...../s

And Niki Savva who place burnt down after repeatedly ask the ATC Govt to reduce the fire hazard and let her remove trees from her property because of a fire hazard.
On December 29, 2005, when our home and the homes of two of our neighbours were destroyed by a fire that began in adjoining bush controlled by the ACT government, it was not the worst thing to happen in my life.

Still, it was pretty devastating. And too many Australians know how it feels. Thankfully none of us was home. I say thankfully because we didn’t witness the *destruction of things we held dear, except on the news when we watched the flames of the devil in concert erupting from the roof. We didn’t have to hear the terrifying roar, never had to make that agonising decision about how long to fight or when to run.

That only three houses were destroyed and another damaged was thanks to the fast action of the fire brigade, and a wind change. The whole suburb could have gone up, which would have been a different story, like in 2003 when Canberra was devastated by fires that killed four people and destroyed 470 homes.

We didn’t expect any sympathy and we didn’t get any. *Instead we were blamed for the loss of our homes by the greenest of green governments in Australia, which had failed miserably to manage its vacant reserve. The *experience only deepened my exasperation with the failures of government at critical times and with the zealots on both sides of the climate change debate: those who act as if the solution is to head back to the Dark Ages, and those who argue that because Australia alone can’t fix it right now, today, then it’s pointless to do anything. Hang the consequences for the economy and our living standards on the one hand, or learn to live with fires, drought and floods on the other. Everything — our forests, water and intimate surrounds — can be managed better by us as individuals or by those we elect, but often it seems once the crisis passes, so too the desire for permanent solutions.

The last thing the Greens *appear to want is any kind of *sensible solution because they profit from the fight. So do those who despise them whose bile, often directed at children, for god’s sake, only encourages lazy governments. The all-or-nothing discourse is dispiriting. Ultimately, whatever improvements we make to our *environment, to clear the air and water and sustain vegetation, will help us and the planet stay safer and healthier.

In our case, we had been pleading for months with the ACT government, via letters from our corporate body secretary, for regular clean-ups of the adjoining land, home of the historic Can*berra brickworks where the distinctive red bricks were forged to build the national capital.

For years my husband cleared an area behind our fence of a couple metres wide to provide a firebreak and try to ward off the critters — brown snakes, foxes, kangaroos. He still does.

We feared, even before 2003, at some point fire would break out in the brickworks. A few months after those fires the authorities visited to discuss removing trees from the other side of our brush fencing because they could be a fire hazard. We asked if three tall pines on our side of the fence could be removed. If trees like them were a fire hazard on one side of the fence, they were surely fire hazards on the other. We didn’t want every tree removed, just those we thought might be a threat. They denied permission, suggesting the pines were heritage-listed.

Soon the reserve was again overgrown. Mounds of blackberry bushes were sprayed and the remains left to become tinder dry. Grasses flourished, shrubs and trees self-seeded. *Repeated written requests for a clean-up went unheeded. We asked again in 2005 for permission to remove the pines. They sent two experts with tape measures. They noted the size of the trunks, their distance from the house, the overhang of their canopies and so on. Finally we *received written permission to *remove them — with one condition. We had to wait three months *before we could chop them down, a “cooling off” period.

Those three months expired on December 29, 2005. The fire began in the long grasslands of the brickworks, devoured the dried-out blackberry bushes, then hit our pine trees, which lit up like giant candles, according to our neighbour who tried to douse the fire with a hose.

I found burnt branches of pine inside what remained of our house. I am no forensic expert but my theory is they dropped on to the roof, burnt through the skylights and the tiles, igniting the house. The cause was never established although two youngsters confessed to police they had been smoking in the brickworks.

All the damaged properties were surrounded by brush fencing, which the builder had been *required to install when the *houses were built in the early 1980s, because, as he told us, the government decreed it blended in better with the environment.

In the fight between the *insurance company and the government, the government argued the brush fencing was responsible for the destruction; a police report blamed the fuel loads in the *government-owned reserve. So it was our fault for not replacing fencing the government had for environmental aesthetics insisted on, *despite neighbours metres away with brush fencing being *unscathed.

Apart from losing some precious things, what hurt most was seeing the scorched earth that used to be our garden full of plants, many of which had been given to me by my parents. Don’t get me started on the looting of the few that remained. One of the men who had come to measure the trees was the local ABC radio gardening guru. He *described my yard that day as a small oasis. He drove past a few days after the fire to see what had happened. Spotting him, I asked if he would like to see the garden again. He refused but *offered up that at least they had given approval for the trees to be removed.

I believe it is possible for every suburbanite to change their climate simply by careful planting of trees — deciduous ones to provide shade in the summer and allow the sun to pour in during winter. It took a few years to restore our *micro-climate. When Earth Hour began, not long after our house and garden were destroyed, as the government was blaming us for it, while lecturing us on our duties while they neglected theirs, I was tempted to leave the lights on and the taps running all night. They made me as angry as those who rail against moves to ban single-use plastic bags or straws.

The preaching is infuriating. So is the denialism. Much worse is the hypocrisy, a wilful disregard for tending to the basics and the dearth of common sense.

Looking out my window now, my oasis is restored. So are the long grasses on a steep mound *behind the house. We watched them in bobcats build this mound out of contaminated rubble after we had rebuilt, warning them it was too steep to mow. They *ignored us. What would we know?


Not an opinion piece but a first hand account from a former senior correspondent in the Canberra Press Gallery

[Wizofoz]

But WHY is there fuel for the fire? Sure you need increased hazard reduction- because longer, dryer summers mean A BIGGER HAZARD!!

Is that really so hard to understand??

[SRFred]

But WHY is there fuel for the fire? Sure you need increased hazard reduction- because longer, dryer summers mean A BIGGER HAZARD!!

Is that really so hard to understand??

Tin foil hat time, but a longer drier summer may mean a shorter growing season and hence less combustable vegetation!

In our particular case we as loosing winter moisture due to cloud seeding up wind as well as loosing our window of opportunity for HR burning because the NSW RFS has declared extended fire seasons.

[Sunfish]

SRFred, you may be right but the fuel still accumulates each year. Your frequency of hazard reduction burns may reduce a bit, but you still need them.

[currawong]

"In our particular case we as loosing winter moisture due to cloud seeding up wind "

Where is that if you don't mind me asking SRFred?

[SRFred]

Cloud seeding is in the Kossi NP to provide additional snow depth for the Snowy Scheme.

[currawong]

Cloud seeding is in the Kossi NP to provide additional snow depth for the Snowy Scheme.

Thanks, learn something every day.:ok:

[AerialPerspective]

Maybe the Chiefs need to do what ScoMo is doing. Get out and listen to the people who are affected.
They could start at Nowa Nowa.
We have learned naught from past history.
Let's tell the Burning Truth (https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-tell-the-burning-truth/news-story/ae30e22c69a0a9a7fe4141bc4e9442a8)

Surely you are being sarcastic... do what ScoMo is doing... WTF??? You mean going on a holiday when the country is on fire and then, as if that wasn't inadvisable enough, although not a capital offence, he or his office LIED about where he was, then he blamed it on his kids, then claimed he didn't hold a hose, then went to a bushfire affected area and was told to p-ss off (quite rightly) by the locals. To cap it off the moron puts out an ad at taxpayer expense, touting how much he was doing to help.

If you're not being sarcastic, then please don't make me vomit.

[AerialPerspective]

What prolapse said......

‘’YES IT. IS THE EFFING GREENS.’
’

The laborials are so concerned about green votes that they adopted their environmental policies.

1. Our local council refuses to allow the removal of dead killer trees because they say they are habitat trees for animals, at least until they burn. We have two outside our local fire station and we can’t remove them!


2. State governments are lazy know nothings whose inner city policy staff know SFA about the bush.

Example: Near me is a 23km long dirt road which is dotted with bush camping sites. It receives 90,000 visitors per year. It’s not unusual to have upwards of 5000 campers on a holiday long weekend.

The road is a dead end. The whole area is a fire trap - impossible to defend or attack a fire. Fire trucks will collide with idiots trying to flee if there is a fire. We have pleaded with state and local government to at least seal the road and build NSPs at regular intervals - no result.

3. The academics and officials are telling half truths. Yes, Fuel reduction burns probably don’t help in a catastrophic crowning fire. However you won’t get a catastrophic fire if you have removed most of the fuel in the first place.

4. There is no way you can afford permanent paid rural firefighters to cover any state. Victoria has 35,000 volunteers. Smothering even a small grassfire (400 acres) may take twenty tankers that need to be on scene within minutes.



5. Do the basic maths. The bush is ALWAYS going to burn. You get to choose when if you are lucky. You can choose low intensity fuel reduction burns or catastrophe - your choice.......and **** sydney and melbourne air quality concerns.

To put that in terms a greenie might understand, IF THERE IS NO FUEL ON THE FOREST FLOOR, YOU CANT GET A CATASTROPHIC FIRE!

If we don’t learn this lesson, the next big one is going to leave thousands dead.

... and yet, some of the worst fires have been in areas that were the subject of precautionary burns before summer.

We can't afford permanent CFA or RFS paid personnel... no, but we can apparently afford to fly an aeroplane across the country empty on all but one sector for the sole purpose of transporting a certain Victorian Senator's a-se from SA (a State she doesn't represent) to WA (another State she doesn't represent) to attend a shooting expo - and this is just one of the instances we actually know about, we'll never know how much Nero's trip to Hawaii cost because it's been denied under FOI.

We can afford BILLIONS on a faulty combat aircraft (72 of them with another 28 planned to make it 100) that will never fire a shot in anger, submarines that will, likewise, never be used for what they're being purchased for.

[Jabberwocky82]

The fires this year have not slowed down much if anything at all when they’ve encroached in to recently back burned areas.

[601]

No just stating the facts.
Also brush up on who is responsible for emergency services. States!!!!!!
I don't here anyone having a go at the State Premiers for being a sleep at the wheel.
Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk is taking a cruise as 45 bushfires burn in her state.

The Labor leader went on leave last week as bushfires threatened properties on the Sunshine Coast.

Two days after she took off on holiday, 60 homes were evacuated at Perigian Springs and Weyba Downs near Noosa.


At least ScoMo had identified a flaw in the Commonwealth use of the Military in emergency situations and has proposed changes. Tidley squat from the States on this matter as it would take away some of their "responsibility"

[currawong]

No surprise then that the States are resisting a Federal Royal Commission.

Prior findings at previous inquiries and commissions have largely been ignored.

By whom and to what extent will be something the public needs to see, given the current narrative.

For example, the mismanagement of aerial assets by some State Authorities is well known.

Do not expect to hear about it here though as all contractors and personnel are forbidden to comment to media or on social media without prior authority approval.

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/states-resist-bushfire-royal-commission-oppose-expansion-of-powers-20200114-p53r9l

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/firefighters-are-urging-scott-morrison-to-rethink-federal-royal-commission-into-bushfires

[HK144]

For your benefit AerialPerspective - whilst the jets may fly empty, the crews are also undertaking training operating the aircraft at the same time. I don't hear anyone complaining about a C17 or KC30 operating empty to or from Amberley. I am also glad to here that you have a crystal ball and can state that the F35 and submarines will never be used in anger, must let me see that crystal ball for the Lotto numbers next week. Re your Nero comment, if indeed the PM used a KC30/F7x to Hawaii, can you confirm that the aircraft returned empty or if in the case of the KC30, that it did not operate ADF tasking after deplaning the PM?

[HK144]

I really thought this was an aviation related site, not name calling and political point scoring. For what it is worth we should all accept responsibility for the current predicament we are in. Many studies my climatologists/fire experts have identified an increasing intensity and speed of our bushfires. These studies have been forwarded to Governments both Federal and State and both parties as well as the various state authorities - the same ones that are now saying we told you so. these studies were all ignored. The ex state fire commissioners had more than enough opportunity to enact the required effort to correct poor management of our state and crown land, but again did little or nothing. Before anyone calls me a climate change non-believer, I do believe in climate change; however, I do not accept we started it - we have certainly not helped the climate since industrialisation, but we did not start it. I also agree that we cannot blame the current Green Party to halting reduction burning; however, I believe that their mantra over the years - conservation, conservation, conservation etc has made many jurisdictions reluctant to burn. Perhaps they are more concerned about attracting more residents to their shires and attract rates etc. In all the name calling and blame game, I have not once heard anyone refer to the experts in land management and reduction burning - our indigenous peoples. They are certainly laughing at us watching us act like little school children who lost the cricket game. How about we all stop name calling and cheap point scoring and accept responsibility for what has occurred and get together to map out a way ahead. This is Australia not some second rate state.

Rant over and now back to aviation.

[601]

I have not once heard anyone refer to the experts in land management and reduction burning - our indigenous peoples.

Been plenty of that on the Media. Cultural burning it is now called .
Back in the 50s I was taught that the country was burnt to "muster" animals for food and to also entice animals to feed on the new growth when it rained after a burn. This enabled easier hunting.
Or was I taught an urban myth?

I would still prefer a fleet of CL515, even though we may have to wait. We could also manufacturer then in OZ. Just re-open the old GAF!!

[AerialPerspective]

For your benefit AerialPerspective - whilst the jets may fly empty, the crews are also undertaking training operating the aircraft at the same time. I don't hear anyone complaining about a C17 or KC30 operating empty to or from Amberley. I am also glad to here that you have a crystal ball and can state that the F35 and submarines will never be used in anger, must let me see that crystal ball for the Lotto numbers next week. Re your Nero comment, if indeed the PM used a KC30/F7x to Hawaii, can you confirm that the aircraft returned empty or if in the case of the KC30, that it did not operate ADF tasking after deplaning the PM?

A fleet of up to 43 F-111s including spare airframes were in the service of the RAAF for 37 years and never fired a shot in any conflict. 6 Collin's Class submarines, how many times have they been deployed in a war zone??? Past experience is not a bad predictor of the future.

And, please don't make me laugh. So, you think it's OK to spend $40K of taxpayers money for a useless politician to fly one sector of three to attend a personal event, not government related and not even in the state which she is a Senator from??? On the same day, Matthias Cormann flew economy class on a normal commercial flight but that wasn't good enough for the former sports rorts minister. Or perhaps you prefer Cormann to accidentally forget to pay for his ticket.

[AerialPerspective]

No just stating the facts.
Also brush up on who is responsible for emergency services. States!!!!!!
I don't here anyone having a go at the State Premiers for being a sleep at the wheel.


At least ScoMo had identified a flaw in the Commonwealth use of the Military in emergency situations and has proposed changes. Tidley squat from the States on this matter as it would take away some of their "responsibility"

Yeh. I've heard that apologist BS about ScoMo... when the Japanese bombed Darwin, did Curtin go for a ski holiday to New Zealand???

No one cares if it's a State responsibility, I'm fully aware of that, but he's supposed to be a national leader... someone who eviscerated Christine Nixon for going out to dinner during a bushfire in Melbourne 10 or so years ago. I don't care what the QLD Premier did, she goes on the list of so-called leaders abandoning the place when it's burning... that's your defence is it? It's OK for ScoMo to do it because someone else did too? Oh, silly me.

Don't be such an apologist. How about you do your research, this bloke is not a leader's a-sehole... he got the preselection by spreading BS about the incumbent Member for Cook, he has spewed BS since he entered parliament and has no idea what leadership is about. At this point I'd rather have Tony Abbott and that's saying something.

[AerialPerspective]

I really thought this was an aviation related site, not name calling and political point scoring. For what it is worth we should all accept responsibility for the current predicament we are in. Many studies my climatologists/fire experts have identified an increasing intensity and speed of our bushfires. These studies have been forwarded to Governments both Federal and State and both parties as well as the various state authorities - the same ones that are now saying we told you so. these studies were all ignored. The ex state fire commissioners had more than enough opportunity to enact the required effort to correct poor management of our state and crown land, but again did little or nothing. Before anyone calls me a climate change non-believer, I do believe in climate change; however, I do not accept we started it - we have certainly not helped the climate since industrialisation, but we did not start it. I also agree that we cannot blame the current Green Party to halting reduction burning; however, I believe that their mantra over the years - conservation, conservation, conservation etc has made many jurisdictions reluctant to burn. Perhaps they are more concerned about attracting more residents to their shires and attract rates etc. In all the name calling and blame game, I have not once heard anyone refer to the experts in land management and reduction burning - our indigenous peoples. They are certainly laughing at us watching us act like little school children who lost the cricket game. How about we all stop name calling and cheap point scoring and accept responsibility for what has occurred and get together to map out a way ahead. This is Australia not some second rate state.

Rant over and now back to aviation.

Hear! Hear!

[currawong]

"A fleet of up to 43 F-111s including spare airframes were in the service of the RAAF for 37 years and never fired a shot in any conflict."

One of the reasons they never fired a shot is we had them.

Called a deterrent.

"6 Collin's Class submarines, how many times have they been deployed in a war zone???"

Likely you will never know.:ok:

[Sunfish]

What Currawong said, especially about the subs.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Aerial Perspective, your detailed account of how strategic deterrence works, while absolutely riveting and great entertainment value, is irrelevant to this thread

And for what it's worth, if you really think the Collins class subs have spent their entire time in Australian waters, it says more about how ill conceived your views on defence spending are than anything I or anyone else could reply to you with, so you've saved me some effort.

[AerialPerspective]

Aerial Perspective, your detailed account of how strategic deterrence works, while absolutely riveting and great entertainment value, is irrelevant to this thread

And for what it's worth, if you really think the Collins class subs have spent their entire time in Australian waters, it says more about how ill conceived your views on defence spending are than anything I or anyone else could reply to you with, so you've saved me some effort.

Strategic deterrence, yeh, I agree the F-111 was a strong deterrent. If it was so necessary though, why was it replaced with the laughable F-18E/F... an aeroplane with about a 5th of combat radius, about a 1/3rd of the load and operating at Mach 1.8 vs March 2.3... that blows the deterrence argument out of the water when it is replaced with something that is bloody anaemic by comparison. Even the F-35 is a flawed aircraft... better hope it gets everything on the way in to a battle because it's lit up like a Xmas tree on the way out, lacking all round stealth. The F-111 didn't have stealth but it had speed and could outrun just about anything else, even the Su-35. Only the F-15 is quicker as conventional aircraft go.

As for the submarines, they have been so plagued with problems from day 1, what makes you think the new ones will be any different?

[AerialPerspective]

"A fleet of up to 43 F-111s including spare airframes were in the service of the RAAF for 37 years and never fired a shot in any conflict."

One of the reasons they never fired a shot is we had them.

Called a deterrent.

"6 Collin's Class submarines, how many times have they been deployed in a war zone???"

Likely you will never know.:ok:

The 'deterrent' was thrown away in 2010, so that argument doesn't wash. The submarines have been plagued with problems from day one, what makes you think the new ones will be any different? Singapore now has a more potent Air Force than we do so don't make me laugh...

[Sunfish]

Oh dear! I don’t know where to start...... As for the subs, nobody will tell you what they get up to,
but if it’s anything like Oberon class escapades, they suffice. As for the aircraft, the F111, I’m told it was problematic once look down/shoot down system became readily available but I wouldn’t know. I also think I heard that there are these things called stand off weapons that don’t require an F111 to deliver them effectively.

[currawong]

The 'deterrent' was thrown away in 2010, so that argument doesn't wash. The submarines have been plagued with problems from day one, what makes you think the new ones will be any different? Singapore now has a more potent Air Force than we do so don't make me laugh...

"That argument doesn't wash"

:}

[thorn bird]

If what we hear is true regarding our submarine procurement program, prejudice and outright ineptness would lead us to the conclusion that they will be a giant white elephant.

Obsolete before the first one is delivered, massively expensive because of Australia's unique requirements and very difficult to find manpower to crew from what we hear regarding our current boats, which apparently Beijing can hear when they start engines for a mission.

I may be very wrong because I have only what I read to go on but I can't help believing we may be shooting ourselves in the foot for not embracing nuclear.

Same prejudice that prevents us from building the only emissions free technology for generating affordable base load electricity.

[601]

Australia's unique requirements

When did CASA take over the delivery of the subs?

I may be very wrong because I have only what I read to go on but I can't help believing we may be shooting ourselves in the foot for not embracing nuclear.

Same prejudice that prevents us from building the only emissions free technology for generating affordable base load electricity.

Some people just don't believe the science but keep pointing to 3 accidents.

Back to the thread, when can we expect to see the first of our own aerial assets, other than the NSW 737.?

I wonder how many workers have been killed in the erection of wind turbines or installing solar panels.

[Asturias56]

"I may be very wrong because I have only what I read to go on but I can't help believing we may be shooting ourselves in the foot for not embracing nuclear."

Nuclear isn't simple and it isn't cheap - go look and see how much it costs the Brits to keep their N subs running and how long and how much it costs to build them

[AerialPerspective]

Oh dear! I don’t know where to start...... As for the subs, nobody will tell you what they get up to,
but if it’s anything like Oberon class escapades, they suffice. As for the aircraft, the F111, I’m told it was problematic once look down/shoot down system became readily available but I wouldn’t know. I also think I heard that there are these things called stand off weapons that don’t require an F111 to deliver them effectively.

Stand off weapons... yeh, that's why we bought the F-111s in the first place because of their capability with stand-off weapons, long-range and low-level supersonic capability with terrain following radar, being low enough and far away enough (but able to go a long way in the first place) that stealth isn't really a factor if we had kept them... that made them a formidable 'deterrent' which was never used, never fired a shot in anger. To suggest that was because we had them that we never got attacked is stretching it a bit as though diplomacy and good regional relations never played any part, but the reason the argument is naff is because with all that capability (and yes, they were old, but so will the USAF B-52 long range subsonic bombers be in 2045 when they are retired after 80 years service) they were dispensed with, replaced with an aeroplane that has only front-on stealth (not all-round), half the speed and half the range or less and can't get anywhere without a tanker the size of a small apartment building sticking out like the proverbial on any half-sophisticated radar.

Not to mention that as stated, if they don't get everything on the way in, they'll be toast on the way out.

The fact this has happened (the F-111 being retired) means that the deterrent really isn't required required other than for 'show'. The fact is, according to several military people I've known over the years, it is ALL show because we actually are incapable of defending ourselves if it happened anyway. So, we may as well have kept the F-111s and spent the money on something else. They ONLY reason the USAF agreed to retire their F-111s is because they got the larger scale B-1B to replace it.

As for the subs, yeh, I may not 'ever' know whether they're used or have been or not but the understanding of most people is they've spent most of their life in port due to endless problems.

Most of the rhetoric from defence and government is BS... I remember the Chief of AF saying at the time "Range isn't really important these days" when being questioned about the fact the F-18F has a 5th of the range of the F-111 and is slower... Mmm... that'd be why the RAAF have been looking into conformal tanks for the F-18 Supers in the last few years, because "range doesn't matter" (or, as is more likely, that was just the BS at the time to chop the -111s and justify buying a useless aircraft that no one other than the Americans have bought (then only because, well, the Military Industrial Complex) but now when it's died down a bit, it appears range is important. The F-18F was bought with zero evaluation and zero assessment, it's a known fact. I don't doubt we need a 'deterrent' but we should not be p-ssing money up against the wall on rubbish that has not even been assessed as meeting our capabilities.

[Sunfish]

Aerial, i know SFA about current operational issues, but I knew enough in my day to suggest your analysis is “problematic”. You are welcome to your opinions.

[Asturias56]

"yes, they were old, but so will the USAF B-52 long range subsonic bombers be in 2045 when they are retired after 80 years service)"

I wouldn't bet on that .............. they will probably go on forever...........

[rattman]

Back onto subject.

With the end of service approaching for the blackhawks wonder if these would be viable to be converted to replace/suppliment the bell 214's. They had a bad year with 3 crashes but no fatalities, I have heard they all happened due to engine failure / hicups at low level. But with the blackhawk being a twin allow it operate more safely down at low altitude where bombing happens. Comes down to how clapped out and comparitive maintainence cost, we as a country obviously have the human skillsets for these aircraft, parts availablity would still be good

[Sunfish]

I have seen one Blackhawk(I think) fire bomber that was set up for night vision and night water bombing. I wouldn’t know if the Australian ones could be suited or if the Sikorsky/Defence supply contract permitted their use. Then there is the little matter of spares and maintenance.

[rattman]

]I have seen one Blackhawk(I think) fire bomber that was set up for night vision and night water bombing.

They had that idea for the C-130's, for the previous fire season but its never been certified for use in australia or the US afik


or if the Sikorsky/Defence supply contract permitted their use

Considering you will be able to buy a zero hours airframe from pickles auction next month, doubt theres any restriction on what happens to the fleet

Then there is the little matter of spares and maintenance

Spares are still available, new blackhawks are still rolling off the line. We have the a human skill sets for operation and maintainence of the aircraft.

Coulson and someone else are partnered up to convert blackhawks and a chinooks in the same way they converted the the 737, by the time the blackhawks leave service these designs should be nailed down and certified

Theres a video of them on facebook about them

[Bend alot]

4. There is no way you can afford permanent paid rural firefighters to cover any state. Victoria has 35,000 volunteers. Smothering even a small grassfire (400 acres) may take twenty tankers that need to be on scene within minutes.



Respectfully disagree a bit.

Something like 12,000 permanent paid rural firefighters for a state such as NSW appropriately resourced with future proactive vision, would change the landscape of fires in Australia.

Currently we are reactive when it comes to rural fires, with the exception of some small fuel reduction burns.

The 12,000 figure is a rough calculation, but just match the location and numbers of policemen in the non city areas. Job opportunities in rural towns is a good thing allround for towns.
Then some forward thinking - perhaps building canals in various sizes in strategic locations, for water bombing aircraft to collect water (more jobs and).Think big plan over time to have paid firemen and a fire fighting aircraft and helicopter in every town.

Cost, yes there is a large setup cost to get the ball rolling, but that is the same for all community infrastructure projects. Some of the cost offset would be much reduced short contracts at high prices, the main benefit other than safety and productivity is permanent jobs and training of a new industry in Australia. Jobs create jobs.

Our towns deserve to have a paid Doctor, Policeman, Mailman and a Fireman.

[clark y]

In reference to the Pickles auction and fire bombers, I was wondering if the prospect of picking up the PC-9s and using them for the role of lead aircraft or "Bird Dogs".

[Bend alot]

In reference to the Pickles auction and fire bombers, I was wondering if the prospect of picking up the PC-9s and using them for the role of lead aircraft or "Bird Dogs".
A perfect opportunity for development of intelligent drones. Could be a series of drones showing the best track to drop retardant using more than just visual cues - current ground condition data could be very useful.

[SRFred]

Aren't the Bird dogs generally high wing jobbies for visibility reasons?

[rattman]

Aren't the Bird dogs generally high wing jobbies for visibility reasons?

Yeah plus imagine they would have be twin engine because they are living a low altitude, need to go low and slow when required plus have good loiter time. Which a PC-9 isn't

[ramble on]

Its criminal that we dont have a squadron of 10 dedicated CL415s operating here.
All of the east coast fires were within a reasonable flying time of a water body and 6-10 aircraft could have had a profound affect if utilised early.

The ground based forces dont have the big picture that you can get from simply flying at 35000 ft over the east coast.

Leadership and political guts are gone in Australia.

Either that or some simple diplomacy to coordinate with our northern Mediterranean brothers and sisters to use their CL415 assets during their winter. How many were sitting up there idle for the months of our devastation.
Its madness. The CL415s are strong, amphibious, flexible and can be utilised in other roles by the ADF when not firefighting.

Private companies and individuals are swooping on the fires as a profit making opportunity to rake in millions off the back of the Australian tax payer.

I watched so many small fires during this east coast travesty start as easily controllable small spot fires had they been snuffed out at early dawn. Instead they went burning on and escalated destroying so much especially as winds increased in the afternoons.

The 6 ton drops from a daisy chain of Canadairs will snuff out the edges and concentrate the fire front so that it can be smashed when it quietens - early dawn, or even at night on NVGs.

[Sunfish]

Either my medication is haywire or it’s crazy time at Pprune.

12000 Professional rural firefighters? You couldn’t even afford their annual leave costs. They get meals, rest breaks, allowances, annual leave and paid training. Furthermore, they only work eight hour shifts as far as I can tell. Then what do you do with these folk outside the fire season? 12000 wouldn’t be enough anyway. By way of example, an “easy” 300 acre bushfire absorbed about twenty five tankers and 150+ firefighters for about twelve hours before Christmas. You have no idea of the scale of the fire response required - community supported volunteers are the only cost effective solution when you consider the scale and logistics required.

A squadron of CL415’s? Firefighters would die of old age waiting for Canberra Committees to release them. ...And who decides when there are competing priorities/ ScoMo and Bridget Mackenzie? Marginal seat analysis?

I have two Coulson Sea Kings and a fixed wing water bomber ten minutes from here. They can most certainly beat our tankers to most fires. Would I replace them with a Canberra based squadron? We would all be incinerated before Canberra could get off its backside and react.

[Jabberwocky82]

There are a multitude of politics and bureaucracy that delay quick and proper response to a lot of the bush fires too.

[Bend alot]

Either my medication is haywire or it’s crazy time at Pprune.

12000 Professional rural firefighters? You couldn’t even afford their annual leave costs. They get meals, rest breaks, allowances, annual leave and paid training. Furthermore, they only work eight hour shifts as far as I can tell. Then what do you do with these folk outside the fire season? 12000 wouldn’t be enough anyway. By way of example, an “easy” 300 acre bushfire absorbed about twenty five tankers and 150+ firefighters for about twelve hours before Christmas. You have no idea of the scale of the fire response required - community supported volunteers are the only cost effective solution when you consider the scale and logistics required.

A squadron of CL415’s? Firefighters would die of old age waiting for Canberra Committees to release them. ...And who decides when there are competing priorities/ ScoMo and Bridget Mackenzie? Marginal seat analysis?

I have two Coulson Sea Kings and a fixed wing water bomber ten minutes from here. They can most certainly beat our tankers to most fires. Would I replace them with a Canberra based squadron? We would all be incinerated before Canberra could get off its backside and react.
Sunny it is equal to police force numbers in the same towns = same shifts mate! so it is an easy example of what over decades has proven effective numbers (speeding, murder, rape under some control) and you still have volunteers to supplement as opposed to being the reliance. (very possible and insurance companies support such things with big $'s billions, look it up)

Again your reply is purely a reactive one, out of active fire fighting season is pro active preventative work on many levels not possible with volunteers.

Fire prevention and training would take many of the off fire months and then they would need 4-5 weeks annual leave - not much spare time outside the fire season mate.

You also fail to see the proactive measures of fire fighting and prevention available for a professional force compared to a voluntary one.

A squadron of CL415’s? Firefighters would die of old age waiting for Canberra Committees to release them

Incorrectly in my opinion fires are a state issue - so yes currently waiting for Canberra is a death issue.

[On eyre]

Either my medication is haywire or it’s crazy time at Pprune.

12000 Professional rural firefighters? You couldn’t even afford their annual leave costs. They get meals, rest breaks, allowances, annual leave and paid training. Furthermore, they only work eight hour shifts as far as I can tell. Then what do you do with these folk outside the fire season? 12000 wouldn’t be enough anyway. By way of example, an “easy” 300 acre bushfire absorbed about twenty five tankers and 150+ firefighters for about twelve hours before Christmas. You have no idea of the scale of the fire response required - community supported volunteers are the only cost effective solution when you consider the scale and logistics required.

A squadron of CL415’s? Firefighters would die of old age waiting for Canberra Committees to release them. ...And who decides when there are competing priorities/ ScoMo and Bridget Mackenzie? Marginal seat analysis?

I have two Coulson Sea Kings and a fixed wing water bomber ten minutes from here. They can most certainly beat our tankers to most fires. Would I replace them with a Canberra based squadron? We would all be incinerated before Canberra could get off its backside and react.

It is not coincidental I would posit that in SA the fleet of SEATS are operated by Aerotech First Response. The name gives a clue as to the rationale - hit the fires early often as a response to possible smoke sighting only. Many times this is a false alarm but more often the bombers have done multiple drops before ground crews even get there. It’s a bit like survival in the sea or ocean - it’s what happens in the first short period of time that’s critical.
I am aware of course that the game changes if fires have been going for any length of time or in forest or mountainous terrain.

[Sunfish]

Bendy, right now. 2221, I am no more than 2 minutes from the station and we can put a tanker on the road with 5 firefighters, intimately familiar with the local area, within five minutes.

A “professional” force is going to have to be based in regional locations with a minimum of 30+ professional firefighters running a roster to give coverage of one tanker - and that by definition is going to be 20-30 minutes from the fire ground.

Where I am, I have six volunteer brigades - Six tankers within 20 minutes or less. The volunteer model is basically to be able to “swarm” a fire really fast, from multiple locations. A “professional “ service can’t do that because you can’t station dispersed individual tankers - they have to be centralized which slows response.

Now add to that the problems of false alarms, barbecue flare ups, etc. and your professional centralized model is utterly inefficient.

To put that another way, most fires are small, lightening strikes, illegal burn offs, campfires, etc., not the catastrophic stuff you have recently seen. A monolithic professional structure is utterly useless for the majority of fires and we can replicate that if needed anyway through the use of strike teams, etc.

To,put that another way, command and control, numbers of firefighters, etc. has not been a problem in NSW or Victoria, since by definition, you cannot set numbers based on the catastrophic fire case.

[601]

Its criminal that we dont have a squadron of 10 dedicated CL415s operating here

Wish we could but we missed that boat a long time ago.
But there is hope. Viking Canadair have bought the lne from Bombardier. The CL515 is the latest version. Sadly the first lot are heading to Indonesia in 2025.

[Eclan]

Its criminal that we dont have a squadron of 10 dedicated CL415s operating here.

The CL415s are strong, amphibious, flexible and can be utilised in other roles by the ADF when not firefighting.
You do realise they only made about 160 of the things right? 215s and 415s. And strangely they are all already owned by other people. Maybe if we had any manufacturing capability left in this country we could manufacture more under licence from Viking, I don't know. Or wait another five years for the 515 to become available. Dreaming about the 415 isn't productive but I like the way you think. The more airplanes the better.

Sunfish, yes I definitely think you're off your meds again. Are you aware the NSW gov't already bought themselves an LAT or whatever it is? Wasn't that your original question? Maybe they read the expert advice here and bought in.

[Eclan]

Wish we could but we missed that boat a long time ago.
But there is hope. Viking Canadair have bought the lne from Bombardier. The CL515 is the latest version. Sadly the first lot are heading to Indonesia in 2025.
You beat me to it.
Yes I read the indons are buying the 515s. They don't seem to care about fires very much.... maybe they're planning SAR activities. Or retrieving boat people?

[Sunfish]

LAT’s are great, but budgetary and political pressures automatically mean that in return for a Federally funded “squadron” of LAT’s, the States will be required to give up local operational control as well as contributing to the budget. This will inevitably come at the cost of local, small and flexible air assets because that’s the way the Commonwealth works. They will preach centralization and economy of scale — which means inflexibility and slow response.

To put that another way, I’d be concerned that such a squadron would be “instead of” not “in addition to” because that’s the way effing bean counters think.

As for modeling fire fighting structure and numbers on Police experience, that’s flatly wrong because you need far more firefighters very quickly. I was out at 2.00 am on new year’s eve putting out a monster campfire and dealing with ten very drunk and unpleasant revellers . The nearest police were at least an hour away - we called them, but cancelled when they told us the response time.

[havick]

Its criminal that we dont have a squadron of 10 dedicated CL415s operating here.
All of the east coast fires were within a reasonable flying time of a water body and 6-10 aircraft could have had a profound affect if utilised early.

The ground based forces dont have the big picture that you can get from simply flying at 35000 ft over the east coast.

Leadership and political guts are gone in Australia.

Either that or some simple diplomacy to coordinate with our northern Mediterranean brothers and sisters to use their CL415 assets during their winter. How many were sitting up there idle for the months of our devastation.
Its madness. The CL415s are strong, amphibious, flexible and can be utilised in other roles by the ADF when not firefighting.

Private companies and individuals are swooping on the fires as a profit making opportunity to rake in millions off the back of the Australian tax payer.

I watched so many small fires during this east coast travesty start as easily controllable small spot fires had they been snuffed out at early dawn. Instead they went burning on and escalated destroying so much especially as winds increased in the afternoons.

The 6 ton drops from a daisy chain of Canadairs will snuff out the edges and concentrate the fire front so that it can be smashed when it quietens - early dawn, or even at night on NVGs.

I don’t know the exact numbers, but there are some 802 air tractor airboss’s (ie on floats) in Australia.

what did they end up doing this season? That’s probably the best litmus test to see how CL415’s would go in Australia.

[SRFred]

I don’t know the exact numbers, but there are some 802 air tractor airboss’s (ie on floats) in Australia.



Saw three operating out of Cooma and two air tractors out of Jindabyne at the same time.

[Bend alot]

Bendy, right now. 2221, I am no more than 2 minutes from the station and we can put a tanker on the road with 5 firefighters, intimately familiar with the local area, within five minutes.

A “professional” force is going to have to be based in regional locations with a minimum of 30+ professional firefighters running a roster to give coverage of one tanker - and that by definition is going to be 20-30 minutes from the fire ground.

Where I am, I have six volunteer brigades - Six tankers within 20 minutes or less. The volunteer model is basically to be able to “swarm” a fire really fast, from multiple locations. A “professional “ service can’t do that because you can’t station dispersed individual tankers - they have to be centralized which slows response.

Now add to that the problems of false alarms, barbecue flare ups, etc. and your professional centralized model is utterly inefficient.

To put that another way, most fires are small, lightening strikes, illegal burn offs, campfires, etc., not the catastrophic stuff you have recently seen. A monolithic professional structure is utterly useless for the majority of fires and we can replicate that if needed anyway through the use of strike teams, etc.

To,put that another way, command and control, numbers of firefighters, etc. has not been a problem in NSW or Victoria, since by definition, you cannot set numbers based on the catastrophic fire case.

Your assumptions on how I envisage it are incorrect - that is why it would not work your way, or the way you think it would be set up.

My vision is not just a reactive one, but also heavily preventive with much more than just fuel reduction burns. Arson is an area not currently addressed (except reactively) yet it is a major issue. The whole system requires a different approach.

[rattman]

I don’t know the exact numbers, but there are some 802 air tractor airboss’s (ie on floats) in Australia.

what did they end up doing this season? That’s probably the best litmus test to see how CL415’s would go in Australia.

They had a CL415 out here a few years ago, the report one its service is available online (possibly linked back in this thread somewhere)

[currawong]

"In total more than 500 aircraft, provided by over 150 operators, are available for firefighting across Australia."

Fleet | NAFC (http://www.nafc.org.au/?page_id=168#CurrentFleet)

[havick]

Saw three operating out of Cooma and two air tractors out of Jindabyne at the same time.

I’m talking purely airboss’s scooping, not 802’s in standard land only (non float/non scoop) config.

We all know the 802’s and airboss’s are each awesome in their own right. With no info whatsoever in hand, I’m curious as to how the airboss’s stats stack up this year with total liters dropped from scoping ops. This should be your best indication of how useful CL415’s would probs wouldn’t be to some degree.

[Sunfish]

You would need to do an inventory of suitable lakes, rivers, dams, bays, etc. You would also need to establish/design. approaches for each that takes into account known hazards (the wires over lake Eildon for example).

You would also need legislation requiring fishing and ski boats to keep clear during operations - we have had trouble with this already involving a stubborn fisherman on Lake Nilacootie during helicopter operations.

[havick]

You would need to do an inventory of suitable lakes, rivers, dams, bays, etc. You would also need to establish/design. approaches for each that takes into account known hazards (the wires over lake Eildon for example).

You would also need legislation requiring fishing and ski boats to keep clear during operations - we have had trouble with this already involving a stubborn fisherman on Lake Nilacootie during helicopter operations.

You wouldn’t need to do any of that stuff, you literally just need to see how many drops were done by the scoopers in the last few years, and then see if it’s worth getting bigger scoopers.

Sunfish, you need to give pilots credit for being able to do you know, pilot stuff.

[SRFred]

I’m talking purely airboss’s scooping, not 802’s in standard land only (non float/non scoop) config.



The three at Cooma were all float setups, Jindabyne weren't.

[Sunfish]

Havick, the power lines across Eildon claimed 4 lives years ago, the lake is mostly surrounded by high terrain and it is a popular destination for boaters and fishermen. Trust me when I say you would need to survey the lakes in Victoria at least.

We have also already had trouble with stubborn fishermen getting in the way and there is currently no legislation that prevents them anchoring right on your best scooping zone.

Then there are obstacles like dead trees.

[N707ZS]

Don't forget you can reconfigure airboss between land and float operation.

[601]

We have also already had trouble with stubborn fishermen getting in the way and there is currently no legislation that prevents them anchoring right on your best scooping zone.

If I remember correctly, SEQWater closed some of the the dams to boating in SE Qld this season.

You would need to do an inventory of suitable lakes, rivers, dams, bays, etc. You would also need to establish/design. approaches for each that takes into account known hazards (the wires over lake Eildon for example).

Canadair and National Jet did that exercise, See post #42 Study (https://www.pprune.org/showthread.php?p=10665035)

[currawong]

CL-415 list price, when available was in the order of $37,000,000

For a 6,000 Lt capacity

One can purchase 30 SEAT aircraft with a 3,000 Lt capacity for that money.

Except, they are already here, on contract, with crew, from local operators.

The way said assets are utilised is what needs to be looked at.

[havick]

Havick, the power lines across Eildon claimed 4 lives years ago, the lake is mostly surrounded by high terrain and it is a popular destination for boaters and fishermen. Trust me when I say you would need to survey the lakes in Victoria at least.

We have also already had trouble with stubborn fishermen getting in the way and there is currently no legislation that prevents them anchoring right on your best scooping zone.

Then there are obstacles like dead trees.

So you’re an experienced fire fighting pilot?

[Sunfish]

No, I’m an experienced Eildon boater and enough of a pilot to know that you had better do some real good performance calculations before you enter the narrow valleys with 2000 ft steep terrain both sides. So unless your Canadairs is happy with 45 degree approach and fully loaded climb outs, your exits are one way over bonnie doon, delatite arm, fords creek arm, over the dam wall perhaps Goughs Bay or Goulburn arm because elsewhere you won’t outclimb the terrain. Lake Nihlacootie is much easier. Don’t know about the others

However if you think you can scoop on a hot windy and turbulent day while dodging curious jet skis, wakeboarders, fishermen, water skiers, houseboats, high tension wires and dead timber, then I’d like to watch. By the way, the lake is currently at about 40% capacity which restricts your options a little.

The stubborn fisherman is real and he refused to move, thus impeding helo reloading despite multiple entreaties from CFA personnel. There is currently no law that can force them to move, although upper Murray Goulburn water may be able to close the lake to all but houseboats.

[601]

There is currently no law that can force them to move,

Goulburn-Murray Water in a Public Notice;

Goulburn-Murray Water as the declared waterway manager for Lake Eildon and Eildon Pondage, makes the following declaration under section 203(3) of the Marine Safety Act 2010 (Vic).

State waters means—
(a) the territorial sea adjacent to the State; and
(b) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea adjacent to the State that is not within the limits of the State; and
(c) waters within the limits of the State;

Division 2—Activity exclusion zones
208 Activity exclusion zones
(1) The Safety Director, by notice published in the Government Gazette, may prohibit—
(a) a person or class of person;
(b) a vessel or class of vessel—
from entering, or remaining in, a specified part of State waters for the period specified by the notice.
(2) Subject to this section and section 209, a port management body, local port manager or waterway manager, by notice published in the
Government Gazette, may prohibit—
(a) a person or class of person;
(b) a vessel or class of vessel—
from entering, or remaining in, a specified part of waters under their control for the period specified by the notice.
(3) The period specified by a notice under subsection (1) or (2) must not exceed the prescribed period of time (if any).
(4) A notice may only be made under subsection (1) or (2) by the Safety Director, port management body, local port manager or waterway manager for the purpose of giving effect to a declaration under section 203.
(5) A notice under subsection (1) or (2) must—
(a) describe the part of the waters to which the notice applies; and
(b) specify the person or class of person to whom, or vessel or class of vessel to which, the notice applies.

[Sunfish]

Thank goodness! I guess you would need to define a scooping zone as prohibition for the whole lake would have very significant economic fallout for Mansfield, Eildon, Jamison, Howqua and Bonnie Doon

[Asturias56]

"need to define a scooping zone as prohibition for the whole lake "

Only when there is a major fire tho'..................

[601]

I guess you would need to define a scooping zone as prohibition

Just like the "runway" we had at Redland Bay for the flying boats. The markers looked like big crab pots.

[ramble on]

Just imagine if along with a squadron of amphibian multipurpose water bombers every Australian major country centre was required to build nearby a dedicated 1-2km long dam or reservoir for public use (water & recreation) and that was available for fire fighting when needed.

[Sunfish]

Just imagine if along with a squadron of amphibian multipurpose water bombers every Australian major country centre was required to build nearby a dedicated 1-2km long dam or reservoir for public use (water & recreation) and that was available for fire fighting when needed.


Just imagine if all forests were required to be fitted with sprinkler systems.

[601]

Just imagine if along with a squadron of amphibian multipurpose water bombers every Australian major country centre was required to build nearby a dedicated 1-2km long dam or reservoir for public use (water & recreation) and that was available for fire fighting when needed.

What a great idea.

[Sunfish]

While I would like nothing better than a Canadaire moored at Eildon, I fail to see how Commonwealth command and control is going to be fast and flexible enough to respond to all but major “campaign” fires. I personally prefer the speed of the air tractors response, combined with the precision and flexibility of helicopters. However the more the merrier.

We just copped 17mm :)

[Bend alot]

Just imagine if along with a squadron of amphibian multipurpose water bombers every Australian major country centre was required to build nearby a dedicated 1-2km long dam or reservoir for public use (water & recreation) and that was available for fire fighting when needed.
I sort of suggested that before but at every town not necessarily that long in smaller areas, but sill a reasonable size canal.

Sort of like having a police station and a medical center.

They could be used off season also to create a green belt/s near the towns for training (being sprinklers) and extra protection.

[SRFred]

Just imagine if all forests were required to be fitted with sprinkler systems.

Well the NSW NPWS had one going at Gosper's Mt for the Wollemi Pines. Given their funding they should have no problems expanding across all national parks!

Actually when you look at a lot of the fires, started by an "Act of God", man shovels shed loads of dollars and effort at them to put them out and eventually the guy up stairs gets bored and does the job properly and puts them out himself.

[Asturias56]

"Wollemi Pines" - these days you can buy them at any garden centre in the world for about $ 10.............

[Wunwing]

There are some interesting cost comparison figures for large fire bombers on the Fire Aviation site. While the figures will certainly not be accurate for Australia the difference between aircraft type costs will be relevant. In particular the costs/gallon dropped for the B737 v MD80 and the Bae 146 v RJ are interesting. I assume the lower cost of the MD and 146 represent the cheaper hull purchase price?

Wunwing

[vne165]

Sorry for the slight thread drift however during the recent fires I began to wonder whether regional railway freight/grain lines (those that are still maintained :ugh:) might be a potential means by which water and fire fighting assets could be deployed. Seems to me that a few thousand tons of water tanker cars could be mobile fairly smartly from a central location - maybe even more capacity than that could be moved. Fallen trees aside (cow catchers??), railway lines would seem to be fairly robust with regard to fire attack. A purpose built fire fighting train may be another arrow in the quiver given the extent of regional lines and could provide a central re-filling point for mobile ground based and aerial fire fighting assets. Just a thought.

[Sunfish]

Last night about 7.00 pm the siren went off. Lightening strike started a fire (the rain is patchy) about a hectare of grass and a few trees about 20 mins away on a cattle property. Three tankers (15 crew) from different locations attended and we had it out in an hour.

This is typical of your fires. If it was daylight and the fire was spreading then there was a helo and air tractor about ten minutes or less away.


It’s all right to think big, professional firefighters, squadrons of giant aircraft, man made lakes, central command in Canberra, etc. but the reality is they will sit around eating money for most of the year. A cocky with a nap sack spray does it quicker and for free.

BTW, we now have 14 new members under training, mostly young folk, I suspect as a result of the fires and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was happening elsewhere.

[Sunfish]

FWIW, the best return, in my opinion, on investment right now (apart from new trucks for the RFS) would be a GPS enabled ruggedised iPad with an emergency mapping app in every truck. Possibly with a two way datalink. We still suffer from people unsure of fire location and losing their way. Not everyone, even locals, know all the terrain.

[601]

Possibly with a two way datalink
Satellite possibly but with 3/4/5g?

[Sunfish]

A continuous link would be nice, but just not having to try and turn pages and navigate in a bouncing truck would be great for some of our “navigationally challenged” colleagues.

[601]

A large air tanker that can dump 15,000 litres of water onto a bushfire will be based in Queensland from the next fire season. Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk expressed her desire last year for the tanker, saying her government would pay for the aircraft on its own if federal counterparts didn't offer cash. On Thursday, she announced funds to cover the cost of basing the aircraft in Queensland under a deal with the National Aerial Firefighting Centre.
The Government said it expected to use an RJ85 plane for this year and then a C130 for the rest of the four-year contract.

Our esteemed Premier could not help herself about Federal funding. Surely she knows that the States fund emergency equipment.

[Wunwing]

601.
Are you saying that funding for LFAs in Queensland is different to the rest of the States and Territories?

For the rest of us the LFAs are funded through the NAFC, the "N" standing for NATIONAL, which seems to indicate its a Federal body?

There is a good article about some of the conditions of that funding in this Saturday's Sydney Morning Herald and I assume the Mebourne Age.

Wunwing

[SRFred]

NAFC is a business unit .... About NAFC | NAFC (http://www.nafc.org.au/?page_id=111On)

1 July 2018, NAFC transitioned to become a business unit of the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFAC). Under the transition plan, NAFC retains its trading name, profile, staff and functions. NAFC will continue to to provide the same level of engagement with the industry and partners to deliver aerial firefighting services.

Members under the NAFC Resource Management Agreement
Australian Capital Territory
Northern Territory
State of New South Wales
State of Queensland
State of South Australia
State of Tasmania
State of Victoria
State of Western Australia

[601]

601.
Are you saying that funding for LFAs in Queensland is different to the rest of the States and Territories?

For the rest of us the LFAs are funded through the NAFC, the "N" standing for NATIONAL, which seems to indicate its a Federal body?

NAFC is the Federal overarching body for contracting aerial assets on behalf of Members, who happen to be all the States and the NT. But I understand that the individual Member pays for the aerial asset that they contract through NAFC. The Feds can fund the NAFC and co-ordinate the use of aerial assets. No use having aircraft sitting on the ground in Qld if there are fires in Vic.

[Wunwing]

601

Its seems to be a bit more complicated than that.

The extra DC10s and MD80s, according to press at the time, were Federally funded. There were numerous reports when the firestorm broke out that the Feds had taken $11,000,000 out of the budget for LFA aircraft this year. Last Saturdays SMH article discusses when the Federal funding can be used for LFA aircraft.

As usual in this country the whole thing seems a mess but certainly there is joint funding of LFA activities.

Wunwing

[M.Maus]

So she buys an aircraft that can only deliver about 110 tonnes a day like the NSW 737. That is the 737s historic performance.
Using Morton Bay (Greece and other nations use the Med) a Canadair doing just 6 rotations (drops) per hour (the average in North America) with 6 tonnes per drop for 12+ hours delivers some 400+ tonnes of water/foam on a normal day.
The record for drops per day done by a single Canadair and 2 crews alternating in sorties was 207 drops, hence delivering over 1200 tonnes on that day, Italy July 8th, 2018.

And before you say but Australian fires are different because Aus is hotter and dryer look at Spain. Eucalyptus in the bad fire areas around Pamplona and the same average annual temperatures as the Blue Mountains. The Blue Mountains have 40% MORE rain than Pamplona so the fire risk is worse in Spain.

Spain has 21 Canadairs and uses them intelligently - they, like other countries, use them the moment a fire starts and hit it hard Go to youtube and search for Canadair CL-415 water bombers, and idiots with boats and you will see they are spaced 20 seconds apart - 18 tonnes an hour and 15,120 tonnes per 14 hour day sure beats the hell out of 110 tonnes a day with two hours between drops (so that the fire can dry out the drop zone and start it burning again) and waiting for the fire to be out of control before bringing in the heavy hitters..

[M.Maus]

Go to youtube and search for Canadair CL-415 water bombers, and idiots with boats and you will see they are spaced 20 seconds apart - 18 tonnes an hour and 15,120 tonnes per 14 hour day sure beats the hell out of 110 tonnes a day with two hours between drops (so that the fire can dry out the drop zone and start it burning again) and waiting for the fire to be out of control before bringing in the heavy hitters..
OOOPPPS
That should have been 18 tonnes a minute, not hour. In other words, the Croatian Canadair fleet delivers more water in a minute than the 737 historically delivers in two hours. The 146 will have a similar delivery rate to the 737 and, like the 737 can only load as fast as the local water mains can supply the water. To speed that up will cost millions in installing large diameter water pipes to an apron on each airport and having suitable pumps to load at the maximum rate the aircraft can accept. All up she could get two Canadairs for our taxes and have a potent fire fighting asset.
And Canadairs can carry people and supplies, like the 737, though not as many/much. I do not know what the 146 can carry but I suspect it cannot carry people..

[havick]

OOOPPPS
That should have been 18 tonnes a minute, not hour. In other words, the Croatian Canadair fleet delivers more water in a minute than the 737 historically delivers in two hours. The 146 will have a similar delivery rate to the 737 and, like the 737 can only load as fast as the local water mains can supply the water. To speed that up will cost millions in installing large diameter water pipes to an apron on each airport and having suitable pumps to load at the maximum rate the aircraft can accept. All up she could get two Canadairs for our taxes and have a potent fire fighting asset.
And Canadairs can carry people and supplies, like the 737, though not as many/much. I do not know what the 146 can carry but I suspect it cannot carry people..

You’re forgetting right tool for the right job. you don’t use a ball peen hammer when a sledge hammer is needed.

i used to wonder about VLATS until one day I was bombing in a Bell 412 and was working side by side with a Coulson C130 near ballarat. It was amazing to see the effectiveness for that particular strategy that day on that particular fire and I can categorically say that that particular fire would have gone on for at least another 2-3 weeks of it weren’t for the VLAT and small machines mopping up and directing it to the VLAT lines.

[Sunfish]

Why not buy a fleet of Beriev Be200 amphibians? Far more sophisticated then turboprop Canadairs. Probably a lot cheaper and more reliable. Perhaps we could do with about 60.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-200


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x673/mchs_beriev_be_200_waterbomber_3b70f3d87d768c6a360b7fd58d237 4953122c17f.jpg

[rattman]

Why not buy a fleet of Beriev Be200 amphibians? Far more sophisticated then turboprop Canadairs. Probably a lot cheaper and more reliable. Perhaps we could do with about 60.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-200


Because theres going to be a couple of dozen of them world, parts, maintainence will probably expensive. The manufacture has pretty much given up on it, its crazy expensive 40-50 million per plane, you can buy a 737 lat for that price.

Cl-515's would be a better cost benefit, still a few years away but think they will be a be the new thing

[Wunwing]

There is a very good costing of capability /costing of the various types on the Fire aviation site.

What is interesting is the difference between the 146 and the later RJ and the B737 v MD80 series.

Clearly at this stage the much lower purchase price is a major factor with it seems similar running costs.

The argument about filling times reflects the lack of permanent and temporary infrastructure. In North Amercia there are permanent bases with holding tanks which allow rapid fill and turnaround times. They also use air transport capable bladders for the same end. Its amazing how much water can be moved quickly with a breath of compressed air and a large hose?

It seems to me that this operation in Australian must be Federal and it must be standardised on 2 LFA types. That appears to be the B737 and the Bae 146 or RJ.
I wonder if the low LFA utilisation is a product of costs rather than ability to be far more productive?

Wunwing

[rattman]

There is a very good costing of capability /costing of the various types on the Fire aviation site.

What is interesting is the difference between the 146 and the later RJ and the B737 v MD80 series.

Clearly at this stage the much lower purchase price is a major factor with it seems similar running costs.

The argument about filling times reflects the lack of permanent and temporary infrastructure. In North Amercia there are permanent bases with holding tanks which allow rapid fill and turnaround times. They also use air transport capable bladders for the same end. Its amazing how much water can be moved quickly with a breath of compressed air and a large hose?

It seems to me that this operation in Australian must be Federal and it must be standardised on 2 LFA types. That appears to be the B737 and the Bae 146 or RJ.
I wonder if the low LFA utilisation is a product of costs rather than ability to be far more productive?

Wunwing

The time thing is more related to total turn time


One of the main operators of the a BAE/RJ has started producing an external tank that fits to dash 400 aircraft. The official name is https://conair.ca/conair_fleet/q400-airtanker

for some reason timecodes are not quite right have to watch that for about 30 seconds (https://conair.ca/conair_fleet/q400-airtanker)


Blanco liro (youtuber) had a chat to someone from the company last year https://youtu.be/OntotbSz4WI?t=744

[Wunwing]

Its worth looking at the Fire aviation site for costs of delivery on the various types. The appropriate page is dated 13/2/20.

The Dash is not listed because the only operating examples are French registered and the FA figures are based on the US contact.

The French Dash 8s are also use for general civil defense work as both freighters and pax and as such can justify newer aircraft compared to limited use fire bombers.
Wunwing

[M.Maus]

You’re forgetting right tool for the right job. you don’t use a ball peen hammer when a sledge hammer is needed.

i used to wonder about VLATS until one day I was bombing in a Bell 412 and was working side by side with a Coulson C130 near ballarat. It was amazing to see the effectiveness for that particular strategy that day on that particular fire and I can categorically say that that particular fire would have gone on for at least another 2-3 weeks of it weren’t for the VLAT and small machines mopping up and directing it to the VLAT lines. And that is what I am saying - a maximum of 1200 tonnes proven from the Canadair (under ideal conditions that almost never exist) but based on North American figures 36 tonnes per hour average versus 15 tonnes every two hours from the 737 means the Canadair is the sledge hammer with 4.8 times the 737s delivery on average in NA. Using a fleet like many European countries do they can lay down more than 15 tonnes per minute - that is a massive sledge hammer being some 120 times more than the 737 making it a plastic toy ball peen.
And I am not saying VLATs or helicopters or cropdusters do not have a place on the fire front. The VLAT are excellent for creating a chemical fire break ahead of the fire but it is tonnes per hour delivery that wins the day in Europe and VLATs cannot provide anywhere near what the Canadair does. At the other end of the scale helicopters and cropdusters can go even lower over small areas and dowse them more efficiently than larger aircraft.
The C-130 may be able to go as low as the Canadair but the only jet that can is the Bae146/RJ85, which can extend the speed brakes so that it can carry almost takeoff power while flying slowly. All other jets have long spool up times to contend with so must fly higher which results in wider dispersal of the drop -- roughly four times as much if you just double the altitude. Wider dispersal reduces the battering ram effect that the lower drops can achieve. That in turn knocks over hollow trees that if left standing keep spewing hot embers which cause relights and spotfires.
Obviously if the airport has a system that allows rapid reloading and the fire is very close the VLAT may catch up to, or even exceed, the Canadair in tonnes dropped but how many airports in Aus have the ability to load at the maximum rate the aircraft can accept?
Have a look at this years fire zones and the various dams like the Hume weir, Eildon, Thompson and other dams, plus those areas mother nature provides and with relatively long distances the Canadair can still compete with the VLATs because most require a full blown major airport to operate from and the combination of on ground time is what slows them down. The Canadair reloads in 12 seconds without dropping much below takeoff speed and can operate from smaller airports. The VLAT has to land taxi load taxi takeoff and it will never approach 12 seconds.
If the VLAT was permitted to abbreviated approach and departure more time would be saved but if the nearest airport has RPT then it must join the circuit with what ever else is out there.