You guys are crazy. There is no way a medium is more cost effetive than a heavy. Sure if you look at the per litre, but its apple and oranges . 3 mediums still cant keey up with the work of one heavy on a rolling IA. They all have there place. But the when you look at endurace and the amount of water you can get on a fire in the shortest period of time , the heavy "trumps" it. Fighting fire isnt strictly about cost effectiveness, its about how effective you are with the tools you have. Who cares if it is cheaper, if you can never catch the fire and you burn homes. I think your tax payers would agree.


Squirt gun vs the fire hose. You can throw water ll day with the medium and never get the same production or accomplish as much as you can with a crane, 61 or a 234.

You dont go to war with just one weapon.
John S or Sir HC ever flown fire? Ever flown fire in medium or worked side by side of a heavy?

Just curious

RB

skycranes and AN-124 at Canberra
 

Yesterday a Ukranian AN-124 landed at Canberra airport with 2 Erickson sky cranes for the fire season.
Locals are worried this is the start of late night freighter operations at the airport with its new longer runway.
As a firey on the ground the sight of one of those large orange things is often a welcome sight.

limited fixed wing fire work, I work in the industry and am interested in more, also fought fires from the ground for several years. I fail to see how one ac dumping 7000 lt as opposed to three ac dumping 9000 lt in the same time frame is a compromise.

Could it be that 2 engines are better than 1

212 versus 214b's

TH

Can anyone post a link defining the requirements for the HUET and CRM for the 2006 season?
I have done HUET plenty before but am not sure of the currency requirement.

Thanks

Stick to flight instruction ezy air, you are no good at aerial firefighting industry predictions or spelling.

I'm glad the government's literacy programs are working.
GAGS
E86

Comparing the performance of a 212 to a 214B is like comparing the 214 to the Crane, they are wholly different aircraft and performers.

A loaded, straight, 212 on one engine has all the performance of the 214 on none!

Two engines certainly may be better than one for many applications and environments, but they don't translate into a guarantee of performance, or safety.

Cyclic Hotline

I think Twin Head was referring to which aircraft was preferred by the Government for our bush fires. ie Aussie owned 214b's:) or imported 212's.:ugh:

I was under the impression, after talking to RFS that for most of their work it is a requirement to have a twin, hence why Heli Aust teamed up and bought in the Wildcat machines.

Can anyone clarify this further.

CRM and twin-engine requirements
 

Hello Steve 76 and Ned-Air To Air.

Ned, the intent is for more powerful machines and preference is for twins... however that does not preclude singles provided they can maintain the required HOGE margins that are being considered. This requirement is under development.

Steve 76, I sent you an email re RFS CRM requirements. But I have posted the annex to their RFT which stipulates PIC's requirements here:

www.rhoaviation.com.au

and go to the HUET or CRM pages.

Hope this helps.
Conway

Thanks ConwayB, much appreciated.