New Water Bomber for Victoria
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wunwing...
If it's ...
(a) affordable.
(b) cost-effective.
(c) more of (b) than the other available options...
Then undoubtedly it will be examined.
In reality, bushfires in Australia kill an average 5 people per year.... the majority of which would not have been saved by your solution, but which may be saved if we get more fundamental things right, like fuel management and education.
It's the politicians who favour big-ticket items. The people on the ground would often rather have their 25YO, petrol-powered truck replaced with something more reliable.
I can't emphasise enough that in the fire management "market-place", aviation competes for limited dollars. There are a lot of other needs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That said, it is a conviction of mine that we NEED more Fuel-Reduction Burning. Every major inquiry since 1939 has said so, yet the Land Management Agencies seem to have an institutional nervousness on this subject as they get carpeted every time one gets away. Even if the "damage" is minor. Having a larger aviation presence and budget may help them acquire the needed courage to do the work.
Peter
If it's ...
(a) affordable.
(b) cost-effective.
(c) more of (b) than the other available options...
Then undoubtedly it will be examined.
In reality, bushfires in Australia kill an average 5 people per year.... the majority of which would not have been saved by your solution, but which may be saved if we get more fundamental things right, like fuel management and education.
It's the politicians who favour big-ticket items. The people on the ground would often rather have their 25YO, petrol-powered truck replaced with something more reliable.
I can't emphasise enough that in the fire management "market-place", aviation competes for limited dollars. There are a lot of other needs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That said, it is a conviction of mine that we NEED more Fuel-Reduction Burning. Every major inquiry since 1939 has said so, yet the Land Management Agencies seem to have an institutional nervousness on this subject as they get carpeted every time one gets away. Even if the "damage" is minor. Having a larger aviation presence and budget may help them acquire the needed courage to do the work.
Peter
I must commend FarmerPete for his excellent and very knowledgeable input and comment on this thread!
I am sure that the views that he expresses will promote and accelerate the achievement of the optimum airborne fire suppression and extinguishing capability that the fire-challenged States of Australia so desperately need.
Some years down the track Australia will have a capable and reliable airborne fire fighting capability...and future generations will not be able to imagine a time when that capability did not exist.
Pioneers with the imagination and intelligence...mixed with the requisite amount of commonsense...are required now to make that so...
I am sure that the views that he expresses will promote and accelerate the achievement of the optimum airborne fire suppression and extinguishing capability that the fire-challenged States of Australia so desperately need.
Some years down the track Australia will have a capable and reliable airborne fire fighting capability...and future generations will not be able to imagine a time when that capability did not exist.
Pioneers with the imagination and intelligence...mixed with the requisite amount of commonsense...are required now to make that so...
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Wanna Be Up There...
Age: 53
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
FarmerPete,
Thanks for your great posts so far. It's not often we get someone on here who knows what they are talking about and are prepared to argue in such a civilised and respectful manner.
So for a completely unknowledgable one such as I, could you please tell me (if you can), would the fire tragedies in Victoria this year have been avoided if we had some of these you beaut fire bombers on standby?
It just seems to me that these fires were so extreme and the weather so supportive of them, that nothing could have made a difference. Am I wrong?
Thanks for your great posts so far. It's not often we get someone on here who knows what they are talking about and are prepared to argue in such a civilised and respectful manner.
So for a completely unknowledgable one such as I, could you please tell me (if you can), would the fire tragedies in Victoria this year have been avoided if we had some of these you beaut fire bombers on standby?
It just seems to me that these fires were so extreme and the weather so supportive of them, that nothing could have made a difference. Am I wrong?
Fight the the cause of the problem, not mop-up afterwards ($$$$$$$$).
The Age earlier this year...
Call to copy SA arson campaign
SELMA MILOVANOVIC AND MARIKA DOBBIN
February 27, 2009
VICTORIAN police should target suspected arsonists on days of high fire risk, mirroring a South Australian operation credited with halving the state's arson rate in five years, a top Victorian policeman says.
Assistant Commissioner Steve Fontana said yesterday that police in areas such as Gippsland had visited suspected arsonists as part of surveillance patrols.
But an ongoing, statewide door-knocking campaign was a "good, proactive method".
The comments came as Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland prepares to convene a national conference on arson next month.
"Australia must tackle bushfire arson as an urgent national priority," a spokesman for Mr McClelland said. "The cost in lives, properties destroyed and community resources are too high to be ignored."
All options to stamp out the heinous crime of arson would be considered by criminologists, police, firefighters and emergency services, the spokesman said.
Under South Australia's Operation Nomad, police visit suspected and convicted arsonists on days of high fire danger. They also use automated number plate recognition to alert them of suspects driving in fire danger zones.
The scheme — credited with reducing the arson rate in Adelaide Hills bushfires in the past five years — has resulted in 35 people being arrested for arson this summer, while another 40 were given on-the-spot fines.
"I think it is a good practice and it's probably something we can roll out more comprehensively as time goes on," Mr Fontana said.
The Age believes Morwell police made home visits to known arsonists in Gippsland in past weeks, including a 17-year-old twice charged with arson and Moe mother Rosemary Ann Harris, 31, who was sentenced last week to three years' jail for two fires lit in December 2006.
Mr Fontana said 140 NSW police who arrived yesterday would help with arson patrols in fire-prone areas.
SA Premier Mike Rann has written to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd seeking to have Operation Nomad discussed at next month's Council of Australian Governments' meeting.
A spokeswoman for Premier John Brumby said Victoria had some of the toughest penalties for arson in the world. But Mr Brumby would be happy to discuss a statewide approach to arson prevention if it was raised at COAG.
On Black Saturday, there were only two major fires in South Australia — neither believed to have been deliberately lit — despite horror weather similar to Victoria's.
That day, 120 South Australian police checked on about 40 people of interest.
Liberty Victoria President Michael Pearce said Victoria Police would need no further powers if a scheme such as Operation Nomad was adopted.
"If they had a reasonable suspicion that someone may be planning to commit an offence, police have adequate power to monitor and impose surveillance on people," he said.
Meanwhile, a man and a woman who were arrested on Tuesday over suspicious fires in the Officer area — believed to have been lit on February 4 — have been released.
halas
The Age earlier this year...
Call to copy SA arson campaign
SELMA MILOVANOVIC AND MARIKA DOBBIN
February 27, 2009
VICTORIAN police should target suspected arsonists on days of high fire risk, mirroring a South Australian operation credited with halving the state's arson rate in five years, a top Victorian policeman says.
Assistant Commissioner Steve Fontana said yesterday that police in areas such as Gippsland had visited suspected arsonists as part of surveillance patrols.
But an ongoing, statewide door-knocking campaign was a "good, proactive method".
The comments came as Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland prepares to convene a national conference on arson next month.
"Australia must tackle bushfire arson as an urgent national priority," a spokesman for Mr McClelland said. "The cost in lives, properties destroyed and community resources are too high to be ignored."
All options to stamp out the heinous crime of arson would be considered by criminologists, police, firefighters and emergency services, the spokesman said.
Under South Australia's Operation Nomad, police visit suspected and convicted arsonists on days of high fire danger. They also use automated number plate recognition to alert them of suspects driving in fire danger zones.
The scheme — credited with reducing the arson rate in Adelaide Hills bushfires in the past five years — has resulted in 35 people being arrested for arson this summer, while another 40 were given on-the-spot fines.
"I think it is a good practice and it's probably something we can roll out more comprehensively as time goes on," Mr Fontana said.
The Age believes Morwell police made home visits to known arsonists in Gippsland in past weeks, including a 17-year-old twice charged with arson and Moe mother Rosemary Ann Harris, 31, who was sentenced last week to three years' jail for two fires lit in December 2006.
Mr Fontana said 140 NSW police who arrived yesterday would help with arson patrols in fire-prone areas.
SA Premier Mike Rann has written to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd seeking to have Operation Nomad discussed at next month's Council of Australian Governments' meeting.
A spokeswoman for Premier John Brumby said Victoria had some of the toughest penalties for arson in the world. But Mr Brumby would be happy to discuss a statewide approach to arson prevention if it was raised at COAG.
On Black Saturday, there were only two major fires in South Australia — neither believed to have been deliberately lit — despite horror weather similar to Victoria's.
That day, 120 South Australian police checked on about 40 people of interest.
Liberty Victoria President Michael Pearce said Victoria Police would need no further powers if a scheme such as Operation Nomad was adopted.
"If they had a reasonable suspicion that someone may be planning to commit an offence, police have adequate power to monitor and impose surveillance on people," he said.
Meanwhile, a man and a woman who were arrested on Tuesday over suspicious fires in the Officer area — believed to have been lit on February 4 — have been released.
halas
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
FarmerPete,
Aren't there are number of water sking races along the Murray such as the Southern 80? Boats travelling at average speeds of over 150km/hr for 80 k's or so between Torrumbarry and Echuca ? There would have to be dozens of spots along that section of the river that could be used for scooping. I've never been able to read water conditions or depths from photos - the only things that work for me are local knowledge interpreted by the pilot and the trained mark one eyeball.
Best constructed break for a fire that I've ever seen was the one to the east of Gillantipy in the Gippsland Fires of about 2003 - the break was about the same width as the Hume Highway.
****
notmyC150v2
Very unlikley to have made much of a difference - it would have saved some houses and possibly a few lives. In extreme fire conditions that only thing that will stop a developed fire in Victoria is a change in the weather or Bass Strait. The Gippsland Fires mentioned above were a classic example - they'd build a control line, hold it for a few days, the north westerlies would pick up again and then the fire would jump the control lines and they'd start again. After about a month the weather patterns changed and they got it under control.
However, where aircraft have a big advantage is in slowing a fire which has only just started, giving ground crews a chance to get to the scene and contain the fire. It's going back a few years, but I think the advice was if you don't have a fire under control in thirty minutes (can't remember the actual time, but it was damn short) on an extreme fire danger day it's time to start mobilising some serious resources including from a long distance away. The fire that is held by an aircraft might otherwise turn into a very destructive fire with loss of life - there have been many killer fires that started days before the loss of the first life, and from tiny beginnings.
Aren't there are number of water sking races along the Murray such as the Southern 80? Boats travelling at average speeds of over 150km/hr for 80 k's or so between Torrumbarry and Echuca ? There would have to be dozens of spots along that section of the river that could be used for scooping. I've never been able to read water conditions or depths from photos - the only things that work for me are local knowledge interpreted by the pilot and the trained mark one eyeball.
Best constructed break for a fire that I've ever seen was the one to the east of Gillantipy in the Gippsland Fires of about 2003 - the break was about the same width as the Hume Highway.
****
notmyC150v2
Very unlikley to have made much of a difference - it would have saved some houses and possibly a few lives. In extreme fire conditions that only thing that will stop a developed fire in Victoria is a change in the weather or Bass Strait. The Gippsland Fires mentioned above were a classic example - they'd build a control line, hold it for a few days, the north westerlies would pick up again and then the fire would jump the control lines and they'd start again. After about a month the weather patterns changed and they got it under control.
However, where aircraft have a big advantage is in slowing a fire which has only just started, giving ground crews a chance to get to the scene and contain the fire. It's going back a few years, but I think the advice was if you don't have a fire under control in thirty minutes (can't remember the actual time, but it was damn short) on an extreme fire danger day it's time to start mobilising some serious resources including from a long distance away. The fire that is held by an aircraft might otherwise turn into a very destructive fire with loss of life - there have been many killer fires that started days before the loss of the first life, and from tiny beginnings.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a shame about losing the National Safety Council back in 89'. Helitak crews, F27 firebomber, 'Bird Dog' aircraft and a contract with Canada to have an exchange program with their helio's. Bring back 'Freddo'!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
notmyC150v2
I don't know..... How good is your crystal ball?
In an ideal world, there'd always be enough funds, so we'd get to find out. But in an ideal world, there wouldn't be any bad fires, anyway.
In theory, they might have made a difference in some fires and saved some people..... particularly in the case of fires that started on previous days and in milder conditions. Had they been extinguished then, results might be better. On the day itself and under the conditions prevailing, I doubt that any aerial resources would have made much difference.
The same can be said for firebreaks, trucks, earthmoving equipment, and all the other tools that firefighters use.
The best way to control a fire is to have it when you choose, rather than on a blow-up day. The best way to survive a bad fire is to be somewhere else.
Regards......... Peter
So for a completely unknowledgable one such as I, could you please tell me (if you can), would the fire tragedies in Victoria this year have been avoided if we had some of these you beaut fire bombers on standby?
It just seems to me that these fires were so extreme and the weather so supportive of them, that nothing could have made a difference. Am I wrong?
It just seems to me that these fires were so extreme and the weather so supportive of them, that nothing could have made a difference. Am I wrong?
In an ideal world, there'd always be enough funds, so we'd get to find out. But in an ideal world, there wouldn't be any bad fires, anyway.
In theory, they might have made a difference in some fires and saved some people..... particularly in the case of fires that started on previous days and in milder conditions. Had they been extinguished then, results might be better. On the day itself and under the conditions prevailing, I doubt that any aerial resources would have made much difference.
The same can be said for firebreaks, trucks, earthmoving equipment, and all the other tools that firefighters use.
The best way to control a fire is to have it when you choose, rather than on a blow-up day. The best way to survive a bad fire is to be somewhere else.
Regards......... Peter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Werbil...
I thought of that too.
It's not much over 30km from Echuca to Torrumbarry in a straight line, but the race website boasts that in that stretch of river thare are over 120 bends.
I suppose that it makes the racing "interesting"... or something.
Perhaps you'll appreciate the issues that fire services face when managing aircraft safety. Pilots are almost always more skilled than we are, and have more practice in managing the normal safety issues, yet as the contracting organisation, we are required to ensure the safety of our pilots. Neither CASA nor the OH&S authorities are impressed with our status as an "Emergency" service, and require us to run aircraft over fires as though it were pretty much ordinary business. That includes making sure that pilots don't get carried away by the urgency of the situation and push the limits just that little bit too hard. So sometimes we have to develop standards that a good pilot on a good day could exceed, and if somebody went in while attempting to scoop off the Murray, I'd hate to be explaining to the Coronor and CASA, why I authorised that action when the river at that point din't quite meet the manufacturer's standards.
There probably are a few points that are suitable, but I wouldn't claim that there are "dozens" of them.
You're right about the rest, tho. We sometimes need the humility to admit that God puts out more of the big ones than we do. Best we can do is limit the damage until it rains.
Cheers......... Pete
Aren't there are number of water sking races along the Murray such as the Southern 80? Boats travelling at average speeds of over 150km/hr for 80 k's or so between Torrumbarry and Echuca ? There would have to be dozens of spots along that section of the river that could be used for scooping. I've never been able to read water conditions or depths from photos
It's not much over 30km from Echuca to Torrumbarry in a straight line, but the race website boasts that in that stretch of river thare are over 120 bends.
I suppose that it makes the racing "interesting"... or something.Perhaps you'll appreciate the issues that fire services face when managing aircraft safety. Pilots are almost always more skilled than we are, and have more practice in managing the normal safety issues, yet as the contracting organisation, we are required to ensure the safety of our pilots. Neither CASA nor the OH&S authorities are impressed with our status as an "Emergency" service, and require us to run aircraft over fires as though it were pretty much ordinary business. That includes making sure that pilots don't get carried away by the urgency of the situation and push the limits just that little bit too hard. So sometimes we have to develop standards that a good pilot on a good day could exceed, and if somebody went in while attempting to scoop off the Murray, I'd hate to be explaining to the Coronor and CASA, why I authorised that action when the river at that point din't quite meet the manufacturer's standards.
There probably are a few points that are suitable, but I wouldn't claim that there are "dozens" of them.
You're right about the rest, tho. We sometimes need the humility to admit that God puts out more of the big ones than we do. Best we can do is limit the damage until it rains.
Cheers......... Pete
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maxum2400
We may not have lost as much as you think. Neither people nor machinery just evapourated.
I don't think that it's letting any cats out of the bag to mention that the Training and Safety Manager of the Vic State Aircraft Unit, Bryan Rees, is an ex-NSC man. Perhaps that's why he's (IIRC) highly critical of poor use of resources.
Regards............ Pete
It's a shame about losing the National Safety Council back in 89'. Helitak crews, F27 firebomber, 'Bird Dog' aircraft and a contract with Canada to have an exchange program with their helio's. Bring back 'Freddo'!
I don't think that it's letting any cats out of the bag to mention that the Training and Safety Manager of the Vic State Aircraft Unit, Bryan Rees, is an ex-NSC man. Perhaps that's why he's (IIRC) highly critical of poor use of resources.
Regards............ Pete
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete
Your comments on OH & S limits on scooping seem to indicate that Canadairs will not work. Which gets back to my suggestion that we should be using large airport based aircraft in a similar manner to the rest of the world.
Experiments with one aircraft be it an F27, DC6 or whatever prove or disprove nothing. The rest of the world uses multiple large aircraft in a planned and concentrated attack to extinguish fires as soon as they start.
I stand by my original suggestion that serious consideration should be given to obtaining the Sale trackers for conversion while we have them available.
Wunwing
Your comments on OH & S limits on scooping seem to indicate that Canadairs will not work. Which gets back to my suggestion that we should be using large airport based aircraft in a similar manner to the rest of the world.
Experiments with one aircraft be it an F27, DC6 or whatever prove or disprove nothing. The rest of the world uses multiple large aircraft in a planned and concentrated attack to extinguish fires as soon as they start.
I stand by my original suggestion that serious consideration should be given to obtaining the Sale trackers for conversion while we have them available.
Wunwing
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wunwing....
Please ignore the anguished expression on my face. I always look this way first thing in the morning.
I'll merely note that (a) "planned and concentrated" attacks are an issue of policy and management, not aircraft size.... and that (b) "The rest of the world" also has fires, some of which are not extinguished as soon as they start. The first-attack success rate in SE Australia will probably stand comparison with any similar area in the world.
As for the conversion of old, ex-military airframes for specialist fire work, I'll (for what that's worth) happily consider that as an option when somebody can show that it's both more cost-effective than the current strategy, and does not divert resources from other areas of emergency management that are just as vital.
Here are the key findings from the Bushfire CRC Aerial Suppression Research Project.
Please ignore the anguished expression on my face. I always look this way first thing in the morning.
The rest of the world uses multiple large aircraft in a planned and concentrated attack to extinguish fires as soon as they start.
As for the conversion of old, ex-military airframes for specialist fire work, I'll (for what that's worth) happily consider that as an option when somebody can show that it's both more cost-effective than the current strategy, and does not divert resources from other areas of emergency management that are just as vital.
Here are the key findings from the Bushfire CRC Aerial Suppression Research Project.
~Aerial suppression can be effective in providing
support to ground crews and improve the probability
of first attack success by up to 50 percent or more if
the FFDI is in the low, moderate and high classes.
~For an aircraft to provide effective assistance it must
be available at call, rapidly dispatched with minimal
travel time and with logistical systems in place.
~Air operations effectively integrated into the incident
management structure and competent personnel
need to be available to direct the operation.
~The use of ground resources with initial aerial
support is the most economically efficient approach
to suppression.
~The use of aircraft for first attack until ground
resources reach the fire produces the best outcome.
~Large fixed wing air tankers such as a DC 10 are at
a cost disadvantage. This is particularly the case for
first attack when fires are small and where water
drop accuracy is required.
support to ground crews and improve the probability
of first attack success by up to 50 percent or more if
the FFDI is in the low, moderate and high classes.
~For an aircraft to provide effective assistance it must
be available at call, rapidly dispatched with minimal
travel time and with logistical systems in place.
~Air operations effectively integrated into the incident
management structure and competent personnel
need to be available to direct the operation.
~The use of ground resources with initial aerial
support is the most economically efficient approach
to suppression.
~The use of aircraft for first attack until ground
resources reach the fire produces the best outcome.
~Large fixed wing air tankers such as a DC 10 are at
a cost disadvantage. This is particularly the case for
first attack when fires are small and where water
drop accuracy is required.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete
I've got the same look on my face. You seem to have a problem with the age of aircraft that I'm suggesting have some use.
Conair have just purchased 2 ex Pionair Convair 580s for conversion to firebombers. The CV580 is a rebuild of the old CV340 and 440s and are the same age as the Trackers. Airspray is rebuilding L188s which are virtually the same age as the trackers and Aero Union are using A model Orions which aren't all that much younger and have had a far harder life.Neptune inc continue to use Neptunes which are the same age as the trackers.
With old aircraft, companies that specialise in them keep a huge stock of spares and seem to manage them well. The only real problem is radial engines and my proposal is to re engine them with PT6s which are basic industry current standard.The evidence in general ops is the CV580. An early 50s airframe mated with a later 50s propjet which still gives an unrivalled cost base for a reliable airframe.
Wunwing
I've got the same look on my face. You seem to have a problem with the age of aircraft that I'm suggesting have some use.
Conair have just purchased 2 ex Pionair Convair 580s for conversion to firebombers. The CV580 is a rebuild of the old CV340 and 440s and are the same age as the Trackers. Airspray is rebuilding L188s which are virtually the same age as the trackers and Aero Union are using A model Orions which aren't all that much younger and have had a far harder life.Neptune inc continue to use Neptunes which are the same age as the trackers.
With old aircraft, companies that specialise in them keep a huge stock of spares and seem to manage them well. The only real problem is radial engines and my proposal is to re engine them with PT6s which are basic industry current standard.The evidence in general ops is the CV580. An early 50s airframe mated with a later 50s propjet which still gives an unrivalled cost base for a reliable airframe.
Wunwing
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a morning person, either, mate?
OK, OK, it isn't necessarily the age of the airframe. We also have enough ex-Vietnam Hueys around working fires to demonstrate that this isn't the issue.
If the economics of converting and using these aircraft is worthwhile, why aren't private firms lining up to buy them, do the conversion and tendering for fire work at competitive rates?
If they come on that basis, I have no problems with using them.
I know that I keep hammering the economics issues, but what's the use of spending $2 to save $1 worth of property?
Cheers.....Pete.
OK, OK, it isn't necessarily the age of the airframe. We also have enough ex-Vietnam Hueys around working fires to demonstrate that this isn't the issue.
If the economics of converting and using these aircraft is worthwhile, why aren't private firms lining up to buy them, do the conversion and tendering for fire work at competitive rates?
The majority of Contracts for the NSW Rural Fire Service are managed by the NSW Department of Commerce. Further information on tenders can be found by visiting the governments' electronic tendering site:
www.tenders.nsw.gov.au
Suppliers should register their interest by creating a profile and login.
Should you require further information please email [email protected]
www.tenders.nsw.gov.au
Suppliers should register their interest by creating a profile and login.
Should you require further information please email [email protected]
I know that I keep hammering the economics issues, but what's the use of spending $2 to save $1 worth of property?
Cheers.....Pete.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete
Actually I've been up since 0500EST, just not at the computer.
My current expertise is keeping very old aircraft flying so I've some knowledge of what I'm saying aircraft ops and engineering wise. In a previous life I was a B747 FE so I know a little about them as well.
I've discussed purchasing and tendering with some potential operators but the problem is that to be both financially and operationally viable a minimum common fleet size is needed, probably beyond 3 +aircraft, say another 3 airframes for spares, damage, backup etc. On top of that specialised supporting road vehicles and a good engineering setup. That is why I'm suggesting the Trackers. They are cheap to purchase, have an established modification available, have overseas current operators who can train staff and use an industry standard power plant. If you want to look at what is required by a very professional operator look at Neptune Aviation web site.
To justify doing all that, an ongoing 10 year Govt contract is needed and so far no-one that I've spoken to has been able to get a committment for more than one season. Thats certainly no good for purchasing, converting and an annual down time of 8 months of the year.
Its also the current problem with the US operators who as a result of a couple of accidents and the resulting politics including some very interesting sideline operations involving shadowy organisations, have been only able to source work 1 season at a time and thus aren't in a position to modernise.Basically with the exception of 1 or 2 operators their aircraft are past their use by date or getting close
Also of interest is that in the US, their newer ( 1950/60s)heavy aircraft have been gifted out of the USAF/USN stockpile which makes it less costly to startup.That is the reason for the main US guys to use Orions and C130As verses the Canadians who use old civil aircraft like the L188 Electra which was the civil version of the Orion.
What started our discussion is the Vic Gov propsal to use a B747 or DC10 at $10,000,000 cost for the season. My original point was and is that that kind of money would be better spent on something more flexible and longer term than a 1 shot 100 ton drop only here for a limited time and certainly restricted by weight and handling requirements to big city runways.However the only way to get it is by a Gov. and probably the Federal Gov. funding the INITIAL operators via a long term contract. Once an industry is established it may be a different story
Wunwing
Actually I've been up since 0500EST, just not at the computer.
My current expertise is keeping very old aircraft flying so I've some knowledge of what I'm saying aircraft ops and engineering wise. In a previous life I was a B747 FE so I know a little about them as well.
I've discussed purchasing and tendering with some potential operators but the problem is that to be both financially and operationally viable a minimum common fleet size is needed, probably beyond 3 +aircraft, say another 3 airframes for spares, damage, backup etc. On top of that specialised supporting road vehicles and a good engineering setup. That is why I'm suggesting the Trackers. They are cheap to purchase, have an established modification available, have overseas current operators who can train staff and use an industry standard power plant. If you want to look at what is required by a very professional operator look at Neptune Aviation web site.
To justify doing all that, an ongoing 10 year Govt contract is needed and so far no-one that I've spoken to has been able to get a committment for more than one season. Thats certainly no good for purchasing, converting and an annual down time of 8 months of the year.
Its also the current problem with the US operators who as a result of a couple of accidents and the resulting politics including some very interesting sideline operations involving shadowy organisations, have been only able to source work 1 season at a time and thus aren't in a position to modernise.Basically with the exception of 1 or 2 operators their aircraft are past their use by date or getting close
Also of interest is that in the US, their newer ( 1950/60s)heavy aircraft have been gifted out of the USAF/USN stockpile which makes it less costly to startup.That is the reason for the main US guys to use Orions and C130As verses the Canadians who use old civil aircraft like the L188 Electra which was the civil version of the Orion.
What started our discussion is the Vic Gov propsal to use a B747 or DC10 at $10,000,000 cost for the season. My original point was and is that that kind of money would be better spent on something more flexible and longer term than a 1 shot 100 ton drop only here for a limited time and certainly restricted by weight and handling requirements to big city runways.However the only way to get it is by a Gov. and probably the Federal Gov. funding the INITIAL operators via a long term contract. Once an industry is established it may be a different story
Wunwing
Last edited by Wunwing; 23rd Nov 2009 at 03:42.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wunwing.
I'll have to acknowledge that you'e a class or two ahead of me on this subject. That's fine and I'm prepared to listen.
I can also understand some of what you say regarding the economics, although I'm still unsure why you'd be arguing for an in-country fleet that sits idle - as you say - for 8 months of the year. The capital cost incurred would require that the savings over the 4 months of actual operation would have to be pretty spectacular.
Where I may still disagree with you is the assumption that we're currently lagging behind the rest of the world in our tactics or organisation. At some points we are, but that mostly occurs when managers at a local level are still not fully familiar with the needs and capabilities of aviation.
Cheers........... Peter
My current expertise is keeping very old aircraft flying so I've some knowledge of what I'm saying aircraft ops and engineering wise. In a previous life I was a B747 FE so I know a little about them as well.
I can also understand some of what you say regarding the economics, although I'm still unsure why you'd be arguing for an in-country fleet that sits idle - as you say - for 8 months of the year. The capital cost incurred would require that the savings over the 4 months of actual operation would have to be pretty spectacular.
Where I may still disagree with you is the assumption that we're currently lagging behind the rest of the world in our tactics or organisation. At some points we are, but that mostly occurs when managers at a local level are still not fully familiar with the needs and capabilities of aviation.
Cheers........... Peter
Chief Bottle Washer
Originally Posted by FarmerPete
We also have enough ex-Vietnam Hueys around working fires to demonstrate that this isn't the issue.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight International reporting
Australia prepares to test large air tanker for firefighting missions
I note on an earlier post, there was a comment about funding. FarmerPete - how's this new "National Aerial Firefighting Centre" working out? Another QUANGO or actually of use?
Seems like a valid approach to put some actual local data behind the arguments rather than relying on Canada, USA or European operations, local assumptions or even the manufacturers claims.
Australia prepares to test large air tanker for firefighting missions
By Emma Kelly
Australia is set to test a very large air tanker, such as the Boeing 747 Supertanker or McDonnell Douglas DC-10, for aerial firefighting for the first time early in 2010.
The aircraft will be deployed in Victoria between January and late March. The move follows the worst fires in the country's history in February, during which more than 170 people died in Victoria, and amid expectations of a severe fire season this year.
The National Aerial Firefighting Centre, which procures and manages a national aerial firefighting fleet to fight fires throughout the country each year, will run the procurement tender process and evaluate the trial, with support from the Bushfire Co-operative Research Centre.
The centre has been evaluating very large air tankers following the release of its Future Aerial Fire Management Capability request for proposal released early last year (Flight International, 25-31 August). Issues of cost-effectiveness and ground infrastructure have previously prevented the use of large air tankers in Australia.
"Large aircraft that can carry up to eight times the water or retardant of smaller firefighting aircraft are untested in Australian conditions," says Victoria's police and emergency services minister Bob Cameron. He adds: "Firefighting agencies will need to determine how they'll work in Australian conditions and Victoria will test how effective the big machines can be in fighting fires in conjunction with our current fleet of smaller firefighting aircraft."
Victoria has 34 contracted firefighting aircraft for this year's firefighting season, which has already started, and access to a further 176 fixed-wing aircraft and 38 helicopters that are on call.
The large air tanker - some of which are capable of laying a continuous line of retardant or water 30m (100ft) wide for 1.2km (0.65nm)- would be assessed for immediate attack when a fire is small, its impact on a developing fire to help contain it and on a control line. Victoria also plans to test a new suppressant gel as an alternative to traditional foam for firebombing.
By Emma Kelly
Australia is set to test a very large air tanker, such as the Boeing 747 Supertanker or McDonnell Douglas DC-10, for aerial firefighting for the first time early in 2010.
The aircraft will be deployed in Victoria between January and late March. The move follows the worst fires in the country's history in February, during which more than 170 people died in Victoria, and amid expectations of a severe fire season this year.
The National Aerial Firefighting Centre, which procures and manages a national aerial firefighting fleet to fight fires throughout the country each year, will run the procurement tender process and evaluate the trial, with support from the Bushfire Co-operative Research Centre.
The centre has been evaluating very large air tankers following the release of its Future Aerial Fire Management Capability request for proposal released early last year (Flight International, 25-31 August). Issues of cost-effectiveness and ground infrastructure have previously prevented the use of large air tankers in Australia.
"Large aircraft that can carry up to eight times the water or retardant of smaller firefighting aircraft are untested in Australian conditions," says Victoria's police and emergency services minister Bob Cameron. He adds: "Firefighting agencies will need to determine how they'll work in Australian conditions and Victoria will test how effective the big machines can be in fighting fires in conjunction with our current fleet of smaller firefighting aircraft."
Victoria has 34 contracted firefighting aircraft for this year's firefighting season, which has already started, and access to a further 176 fixed-wing aircraft and 38 helicopters that are on call.
The large air tanker - some of which are capable of laying a continuous line of retardant or water 30m (100ft) wide for 1.2km (0.65nm)- would be assessed for immediate attack when a fire is small, its impact on a developing fire to help contain it and on a control line. Victoria also plans to test a new suppressant gel as an alternative to traditional foam for firebombing.
Seems like a valid approach to put some actual local data behind the arguments rather than relying on Canada, USA or European operations, local assumptions or even the manufacturers claims.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior Pilot.
It seems possible that I've been misinformed, or simply got the wrong end of the stick on the subject of their service. It wouldn't be the first time I've made a blue.
On the other hand, it would seem that there are definitely Huey's working fire in NSW.
I apologise for the poor quality of the photograph, but here are HT205/VH-ONZ and HT282/VH-RSL returning to Grafton after working out of Nymboida. They did good work stopping a backburn that jumped the break in half a dozen places, and made some boys on the ground very happy.
The following aircraft are on the NSWRFS List of Approved Aircraft for 2009/10 season. All, apart from HT276 are listed as UH-1H variants.
HT205/VH-ONZ
HT276/VH-UHF (UH-1B)
HT346/VH-UHH
HT271/VH-HUE
HT272/VH-LUE
HT282/VH-RSL
HT263/VH-CPO
HT442/VH-UEE
That's ignoring McDermot's trio of 205-1As.
Humour a simple country lad if you will, and don't hit me over the head too hard for believing what I've seen in the official documentation.
Regards..... Peter
I'd query that assertion: there are very few ex mil UH1's in Oz, and most of your medium Helitacks in Victoria are one Bell 205 (civil variant of the UH1, but dual hydraulics, etc) and a lot of contract Bell 212/412's. No ex Vietnam Hueys at all
On the other hand, it would seem that there are definitely Huey's working fire in NSW.
I apologise for the poor quality of the photograph, but here are HT205/VH-ONZ and HT282/VH-RSL returning to Grafton after working out of Nymboida. They did good work stopping a backburn that jumped the break in half a dozen places, and made some boys on the ground very happy.
The following aircraft are on the NSWRFS List of Approved Aircraft for 2009/10 season. All, apart from HT276 are listed as UH-1H variants.
HT205/VH-ONZ
HT276/VH-UHF (UH-1B)
HT346/VH-UHH
HT271/VH-HUE
HT272/VH-LUE
HT282/VH-RSL
HT263/VH-CPO
HT442/VH-UEE
That's ignoring McDermot's trio of 205-1As.
Humour a simple country lad if you will, and don't hit me over the head too hard for believing what I've seen in the official documentation.
Regards..... Peter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SthrnNSW
Age: 59
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trash 'N' Navs..
You can probably learn as much about the NAFC from the net as you can from me. Pity that their website seems to be 12 months behind. Maybe that tells us something.
My limited info is that it's essentially a committee of the various state departmental heads who determine how the Federally funded contract aircraft are to be used. There's obviously some sense in having a Federally funded asset with a flexible deployment so that aircraft can be allocated according to need, rather than just according to state boundaries. But it's also true that when one part of SE Australia has a bad fire seaon, it tends to be across state boundaries.
A better source for current research into the effectiveness of the various systems would be the Bushfire CRC. Bushfire CRC home
Sorry that I can't help more........ Peter
You can probably learn as much about the NAFC from the net as you can from me. Pity that their website seems to be 12 months behind. Maybe that tells us something.
My limited info is that it's essentially a committee of the various state departmental heads who determine how the Federally funded contract aircraft are to be used. There's obviously some sense in having a Federally funded asset with a flexible deployment so that aircraft can be allocated according to need, rather than just according to state boundaries. But it's also true that when one part of SE Australia has a bad fire seaon, it tends to be across state boundaries.A better source for current research into the effectiveness of the various systems would be the Bushfire CRC. Bushfire CRC home
Sorry that I can't help more........ Peter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/NR/r...dairreport.pdf is an interesting read even if it is a few years old. Does anyone know if there has been any update on it?
Some good ones to watch:
YouTube - Be-200 MULTIPURPOSE AMPHIBIOUS AIRCRAFT
YouTube - Canadair 2 - Fire boss 1
YouTube - Fire Boss
YouTube - Training in Sant Ponc?
YouTube - airtractor 802fb training
Some good ones to watch:
YouTube - Be-200 MULTIPURPOSE AMPHIBIOUS AIRCRAFT
YouTube - Canadair 2 - Fire boss 1
YouTube - Fire Boss
YouTube - Training in Sant Ponc?
YouTube - airtractor 802fb training