Author Topic: Great photo....  (Read 4833 times)

Offline Sombra

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #45 on: August 22, 2012, 07:43:47 PM »
Considering the turbulence over a fire an airship is the last thing I'd want to be in.

They would be unmanned :D. Maybe they could be anchored to the ground in some way, big bags of water connected to the ship... in my imagination.

Actually I found a project of a firefighting airship, different to my "idea" though:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2425-gigantic-airships-aim-to-damp-forest-fires.html

« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 07:46:28 PM by Sombra »

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2012, 08:23:26 AM »
Many of the old airships used water as ballast. Dropping 440,000lb (220ton) of water, yeah right.

Offline Tupac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5056
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2012, 02:04:34 PM »
That thing was flying out of Austin when we had the Bastrop fire last year.
"It was once believed that an infinite number of monkeys, typing on an infinite number of keyboards, would eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare. However, with the advent of Internet messageboards we now know this is not the case."

Offline Rino

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8495
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2012, 02:17:07 PM »
wouldnt it be cheaper to control burn any areas predicted to be at risk?

If only you guys had some kind of vehicle that could deliver large amounts of incendiary devices accurately from the air. and lots of them ... ;)

     A few years back they considered a project  using an A-10 for a water bomber, before it got started they found other uses for the Warthog.
Maybe a mini-me version like this OV-10? :D

80th FS Headhunters
PHAN
Proud veteran of the Cola Wars

Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2012, 02:22:34 PM »
 :aok Yea! OV-10...THEY LOVED THEM BACK IN THE DAY.  :salute
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,

Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2012, 02:25:17 PM »
Glad you have a sense of humor  :aok

I know that in some instances, controlled burns get OUT of control.  I have never experienced the Santa Ana winds in California , but I hear they can turn a campfire into a conflagration in short order.

Yes! There's alot of work goes into a controlled burn...it ain't random by no means!! plus the bunny huggers scream & cry about controlled burns after demanding that forest fires are a natural part of the ecology... :rolleyes: "I want my cake 7 eat it too"  :old:
« Last Edit: August 23, 2012, 02:26:57 PM by W7LPNRICK »
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2012, 02:37:58 PM »
I live in a state ravaged by many fires, over many years. Controlled burns are just as much a risk as fires. Because they ARE fires. It still takes a lot of time and manpower and MONEY and equipment to put out the controlled burns and watch them. If you've exhausted your budget battling real fires, maybe you can't afford that kind of luxury... but mostly I think it's just asking for it to start the fires on purpose. It's very rare you hear about a controlled burn these days. My $0.02.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2012, 04:22:17 PM »
its not the same though is it - controlled burns are done when the conditions are right for the effect you want to achieve, not at the height of a heat wave when it will escalate into a fullblown runaway wildfire. thats why you need accelerants and extra fuel for controlled burn, because the conditions wont allow fires without them. and they are only really needed near urban areas and where agriculture has reduced the size of bush or forests so much that they cant recover on their own.

most ecologies in the wildfire zones have adapted to deal with wildfires in one way or another, many depend on them. it may not look pretty to us for a few decades but its usually a normal and healthy part of the cycle. most wildfires happen without us even noticing and always have but the ecologies in those areas keep on truckin as healthy as ever.


edit: I've seen one small wildfire from start to finish, it was very cool to witness. was watching a nightime storm and then a coupla lightning bolts hit the top of a mountain about 10miles away and a big patch of trees just went up like in Rollerblade. you could see the front moving out from the centre fast, then slowing. watched it burn for a coupla hours and went to bed. it was still going in the morning and was smoldering by that evening. must have torched 20-50sqm of the mountain side before it stopped. all the other tourists were going crazy about putting it out, the locals just shrugged :D
« Last Edit: August 23, 2012, 04:33:54 PM by RTHolmes »
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2012, 04:44:27 PM »
I don't know all that much about the requirements of controlled burns and the policy around them, but I do know that the comment made higher in this thread about "make controlled burns where there's a lot of dead stuff" -- it doesn't hold up all the time. Most times the forest fires that rage out of control are in the middle of healthy forests. It wouldn't do to burn down healthy stock, especially in large sections. Those trees actively hold the soil in place and prevent massive erosion and flash flooding.

I still think that controlled burns are the last resort, for that and similar reasons.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2012, 04:54:34 PM »
controlled burn just removes the light fuel lying around on the ground, not the trees. its like building a camp fire with damp logs - the kindling all burns but the logs wont catch. by the time the logs have dried enough to light, theres no kindling because you already burnt it, and you cant light even a dry log with a match.
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2012, 10:02:30 PM »
'cept he isn't using rudder.  Look at the top...it's aligned with the fin.

Rudder is being used, look closer.
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #56 on: August 27, 2012, 09:16:41 PM »
controlled burn just removes the light fuel lying around on the ground, not the trees. its like building a camp fire with damp logs - the kindling all burns but the logs wont catch. by the time the logs have dried enough to light, theres no kindling because you already burnt it, and you cant light even a dry log with a match.

This is the perfect conditions desired effect....& only that.  :salute
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,

Offline JOACH1M

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9813
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #57 on: August 28, 2012, 12:43:21 AM »
'mercia
FEW ~ BK's ~ AoM
Focke Wulf Me / Last Of The GOATS 🐐
ToC 2013 & 2017 Champ
R.I.P My Brothers <3

Offline Babalonian

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5817
      • Pigs on the Wing
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #58 on: September 04, 2012, 06:43:58 PM »
wouldnt it be cheaper to control burn any areas predicted to be at risk?

If only you guys had some kind of vehicle that could deliver large amounts of incendiary devices accurately from the air. and lots of them ... ;)

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Town-s-Fears-Come-True-Lewiston-worried-that-a-2919692.php
http://cdfdata.fire.ca.gov/incidents/incidents_details_info?incident_id=360


Just one recent example that I'm very familiar with.  Good thing the state had to write off the costliest man-made/caused fire in that county's history because their own employees caused it.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2012, 06:47:53 PM by Babalonian »
-Babalon
"Let's light 'em up and see how they smoke."
POTW IIw Oink! - http://www.PigsOnTheWing.org

Wow, you guys need help.

Offline pensley

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 235
Re: Great photo....
« Reply #59 on: September 23, 2012, 05:39:21 PM »
The OV-10 Bronco is actually used for fire spotting. It flies along in front of the water bomber and designates where the bomber should drop the water or fire retardant. I've talked to pilots who fly the Bronco and they say it's a wonderful platform for spotting. Great visibility and stable. I think it would be a blast to fly. Maybe someday.....
I'd rather be flying!