| Main Forum Page | Start new Thread | Edit your AD | Search ForumLarge firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Wednesday, March 24, 2004 (7:10 AM)Posted by JohnA (61) Edit | Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? | No test results yet but here's some (not all) the news: http://www.landings.com/_landings/pacflyer/mar9-2004/Mn-69-747-firebomber.html bottom article here: http://anchoragepress.com/archives-2004/flashlightvol13ed6.shtml GFMC (Global Fire Monitoring Center) Calendar 2004: 9 March 2004 Consultations with Evergreen International Aviation, Inc., on the Evergreen Supertanker (B-747); GFMC: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/intro/about4_2004.html http://www.flightinternational.com/fi_issue/is_display_free.asp sample piece: Officials hope to begin Supertanker testing soon in Marana By JOANNA DODDER The Daily Courier MARANA � Evergreen International hopes to conduct the first real test of its Supertanker within a few weeks. The company believes that wildland firefighting efforts need a new tool, especially in light of all the aging air tanker crashes in recent years. The death of five air tanker pilots in 2002 prompted the federal government�s creation of a blue-ribbon panel to study its aerial firefighting business. Photo illustration by Evergreen International Aviation Inc. This photo illustration shows a Supertanker attacking a wildfire with 24,000 gallons of retardant. The Forest Service then stopped contracting all PB4-Y and C-130A planes, a total of 11 planes out of a fleet of 46. While Evergreen has been flying the Supertanker with its retardant tanks during tests, it hasn�t made a drop from the tanks yet. Evergreen is based in Oregon and maintains locations in 36 U.S. and 12 international cities, but it is testing the Supertanker at the Pinal Air Park at Marana, which it has leased from Pinal County for more than three decades. Until further testing, Evergreen officials are being somewhat tight-lipped about the Supertanker, although the company has produced a brochure about it with the following details. The modifications to the Boeing 747 are fairly minor. While the company developed the Supertanker for wildland firefighting, it also envisions using the Supertanker for everything from oil spill containment to biohazard response. Evergreen has decades of experience in aerial firefighting and is an owner/operator of 10 Boeing 747 aircraft. Evergreen�s team of more than 50 engineers and scientists is spending more than 20,000 hours on the Supertanker. Boeing has worked with Evergreen to support preliminary engineering studies and the certification of the Supertanker�s components. The Supertanker will be able to perform segmented drops so that it can fight multiple fires on a single mission. Even with 24,000 gallons of retardant, the Supertanker still is 150,000 pounds less than its maximum takeoff weight capacity and less than its maximum landing weight. While current air tankers have to fly down to 200 feet because they use a gravity drop system, the Supertanker�s new type of pressurized system allows it to fight fires from higher altitudes. It can disperse retardant under high pressure for an �overwhelming� response, or drop it equivalent to the speed of falling rain. The retardant drop speed is approximately 140 knots, providing a 30 percent cushion over its stall speed. Evergreen studied seven catastrophic wildfires that destroyed 1.5 million acres in 2002, and calculates that it could have saved the government $108 million in suppression and rehabilitation costs related to those fires alone. Savings to the timber industry likely would have exceeded $418 million, the company estimates. Contact the reporter at from: http://www.communitypapers.com/DAILYCOURIER/myarticles.asp |
|
Posted by Alex (1) Edit | RE: Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Posted: March 25, 2004 (2:33 PM) | First of all I'd like to introduce the article of Rob Campbell where you can find the answers on many questions. The quotation from the article: ".the Forest Service continues to assure anyone who challenges their decision to keep the IL-76 out of American firefighting missions that the plane is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhill as it releases its hold (the IL-76 must release its sheet of water at a parallel position to the land for maximum effect). Like Rohrabacher, the Reporter received no reply from the Forest Service regarding questions about their resistance to the IL-76". Everybody knows that Il-76 twice smaller then B-747.If for USFS the IL-76 is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhil, what they will speak about B-747 firefighter? Why the "team of more than 50 engineers and scientists is spending more than 20,000 hours on the Supertanker". I'm the Russian expert of Civil Aviation and observing the long time games of USFS against Russian aircraft IL-76 and could tell that as firefighter IL-76 at the moment is the best aircraft in the World. It manufactured a little bit rough in compare with Boeing, but it helps him to fly in the hard turbulence over bush- & forest fires on the low altitudes and in the mountains areas. IL-76 proved his advantages to work in Geece, in Russia, in France etc. Big Boeing 747 will be clumcy for maneuvers. By the waY WHAT IS THE AGE OF INTRODUCED Boeing and how many thousand hours/cicles flown. What is his technical condition to fly in the hard turbulence? And the main question is: What for to invent bicycle, to spent money, to spent more than 20,000 hours of more than 50 engineers and scientists" IF THE BICYCLE IS ALREADY INVENTED? Fired up Did the Forest Service fail to do its job? by Rob Campbell Now that we've lost 750,000 acres, 23 lives and almost 3,000 homes to the current string of wildfires in Southern California, it's less than comforting to be told that better firefighting equipment could have been brought in to ameliorate the disaster, but that's exactly what U.S. Representatives Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Curt Weldon (R-PA) contend. In a Washington, D.C. press conference on October 30, Rohrabacher and Weldon led a cadre of other officials in decrying the US Forest Service's refusal to consider the Russian government's Ilyushin-76 (IL-76), an air-tanker that carries 11,000 gallons of water (more than three times the capacity of the Hercules C-130, our largest domestic water-drop craft) as part of their fire suppression arsenal. Rohrabacher, who passionately held the floor and called for an immediate end to the "bureaucratic logjam" that was keeping this life- and land-saving technology from our reach, called the conference when the USFS ignored his demand for a meeting and a prompt, stateside demonstration of the IL-76's capabilities. The IL-76 can drop a near-solid sheet of water on an area the size of 12 football fields in 10 seconds, and because it uses a gravitational, rather than a pressurized, release system, which creates a simulated downpour rather than an aerosol mist, much more of the water released from its holds actually makes it to the ground. Since 1995, the Russians have repeatedly offered a pair of manned, tanked and waiting IL-76s during major U.S. fire outbreaks-asking only for primary expenses to be covered-but the US Forest Service, the body in charge of all wildfire control on federal land, has told them time and again that their services were neither needed nor wanted. Now, they no longer keep the immense aircrafts waiting in the wings, and are waiting for someone from the US government to step forward and ask them over. That is unlikely to happen, as the Forest Service continues to assure anyone who challenges their decision to keep the IL-76 out of American firefighting missions that the plane is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhill as it releases its hold (the IL-76 must release its sheet of water at a parallel position to the land for maximum effect). Like Rohrabacher, the Reporter received no reply from the Forest Service regarding questions about their resistance to the IL-76. This doesn't surprise Tom Robinson, a fire administrator and instructor of fire prevention with the Virginia Offices of Fire Programs and Emergency Services in Richmond,VA who admits to being a "crusader" and "zealot" on the subject of the IL-76. In 1996, he joined Global Emergency Response (waterbomber.com), a Canadian-Russian-American joint venture created to co-sponsor the IL-76 in disaster mitigation around the world. The venture looked hopeful at first, with a positive response from a USFS specialist after a demonstration in England. But the response was squelched on this side of t |
|
Posted by 4938904 (1) Edit | RE: Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Posted: March 26, 2004 (9:52 AM) | First of all I'd like to introduce the article of Rob Campbell where you can find the answers on many questions. The quotation from the article: ".the Forest Service continues to assure anyone who challenges their decision to keep the IL-76 out of American firefighting missions that the plane is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhill as it releases its hold (the IL-76 must release its sheet of water at a parallel position to the land for maximum effect). Like Rohrabacher, the Reporter received no reply from the Forest Service regarding questions about their resistance to the IL-76". Everybody knows that Il-76 twice smaller then B-747. If for USFS the IL-76 is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhil, what they will speak about B-747 firefighter? Why the "team of more than 50 engineers and scientists is spending more than 20,000 hours on the Supertanker". I'm the Russian expert of Civil Aviation and observing the long time games of USFS against Russian aircraft IL-76 and could tell that as firefighter IL-76 at the moment is the best aircraft in the World. It manufactured a little bit rough in compare with Boeing, but it helps him to fly in the hard turbulence over bush- & forest fires on the low altitudes and in the mountains areas. IL-76 proved his advantages working in Geece, in Russia, in France etc. Big Boeing 747 will be clumcy for maneuvers. By the way WHAT IS THE AGE OF INTRODUCED Boeing and how many thousand hours/cicles flown. What is his technical condition to fly in the hard turbulence? And the main question is: What for to invent bicycle, to spent money, to spent more than 20,000 hours of more than 50 engineers and scientists" IF THE BICYCLE IS ALREADY INVENTED? Fired up Did the Forest Service fail to do its job? by Rob Campbell Now that we've lost 750,000 acres, 23 lives and almost 3,000 homes to the current string of wildfires in Southern California, it's less than comforting to be told that better firefighting equipment could have been brought in to ameliorate the disaster, but that's exactly what U.S. Representatives Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Curt Weldon (R-PA) contend. In a Washington, D.C. press conference on October 30, Rohrabacher and Weldon led a cadre of other officials in decrying the US Forest Service's refusal to consider the Russian government's Ilyushin-76 (IL-76), an air-tanker that carries 11,000 gallons of water (more than three times the capacity of the Hercules C-130, our largest domestic water-drop craft) as part of their fire suppression arsenal. Rohrabacher, who passionately held the floor and called for an immediate end to the "bureaucratic logjam" that was keeping this life- and land-saving technology from our reach, called the conference when the USFS ignored his demand for a meeting and a prompt,stateside demonstration of the IL-76's capabilities. The IL-76 can drop a near-solid sheet of water on an area the size of 12 football fields in 10 seconds, and because it uses a gravitational, rather than a pressurized, release system, which creates a simulated downpour rather than an aerosol mist, much more of the water released from its holds actually makes it to the ground. Since 1995, the Russians have repeatedly offered a pair of manned, tanked and waiting IL-76s during major U.S. fire outbreaks-asking only for primary expenses to be covered-but the US Forest Service, the body in charge of all wildfire control on federal land, has told them time and again that their services were neither needed nor wanted. Now, they no longer keep the immense aircrafts waiting in the wings, and are waiting for someone from the US government to step forward and ask them over. That is unlikely to happen, as the Forest Service continues to assure anyone who challenges their decision to keep the IL-76 out of American firefighting missions that the plane is too big, too fast, drops too much water and can't operate under current regulations that require an air-tanker to fly downhill as it releases its hold (the IL-76 must release its sheet of water at a parallel position to the land for maximum effect). Like Rohrabacher, the Reporter received no reply from the Forest Service regarding questions about their resistance to the IL-76. This doesn't surprise Tom Robinson, a fire administrator and instructor of fire prevention with the Virginia Offices of Fire Programs and Emergency Services in Richmond,VA who admits to being a "crusader" and "zealot" on the subject of the IL-76. In 1996, he joined Global Emergency Response (waterbomber.com), a Canadian-Russian-American joint venture created to co-sponsor the IL-76 in disaster mitigation around the world. The venture looked hopeful at first, with a positive response from a USFS specialist after a demonstration in England. But the response was squelched on this side of the Atlant |
|
Posted by JohnA (61) Edit | RE: Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Posted: March 26, 2004 (10:03 AM) | more.part 2 (of two) of the Campbell article: But the response was squelched on this side of the Atlantic, and since then, the USFS has stymied all attempts to bring the IL-76 to the States, even for a further demonstration. This could well be viewed as criminal, according to Robinson, who says that most of the homes and many of the lives lost in the last several major US fires could have been saved had the Russian tanker been deployed. �I�d risk my reputation on it,� he says; a reputation that includes Marine service and a plethora of official honors for his work in fire prevention and suppression, including President Bush Sr.�s 1000 Points of Light award and a National Heroism award from the Secretary of HUD. �The plane does not fit into the Forest Service�s method of operation,� he says, �and if they can�t control it, they don�t want anyone else to.� Robinson, a staunch patriot by all accounts, accuses the Forest Service of a misplaced protectionism and overblown national pride. �They just don�t want to relinquish control,� he says, �but someone with good sense is going to take firefighting away from the Forest Service.� Robinson also says that the US Forest Service continually misrepresents the Wildfire Suppression Assistance Act of 1989, saying that it disallows foreign assets to be drawn into a firefighting scenario until all private contractor assets are completely exhausted. What the Act actually states is that foreign assets may be called in when domestic assets are no longer capable or readily available to handle the situation at hand. Contrary to the various reports of on-scene fire control experts and crew commanders, the USFS officially maintains that this type of capability downfall has never occurred. �Please don�t think we�re picking on the firefighters,� says Robinson, having been one himself for many years, with a handful of successful international missions on the IL-76 under his belt. �They are doing everything they can with what they�ve got.� But what they�ve got, he says, is insufficient, and the USFS knows it. Rohrabacher, Weldon and Robinson are hardly alone in their crusade. Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) wrote President Bush a letter requesting that he go over the Forest Service�s head to request an IL- 76 demonstration, but the administration has yet to reply. Perhaps if the planes were deployed now, at the tail-end of such horrendous devastation, the public would raise such an outcry over recent, needless losses that no one would truly benefit, but at this point, Robinson is not willing to settle for mere capitulation. �I want vindication,� says Robinson. He also states that some lowerlevel USFS personnel have come forward to say that they know the planes should be allowed in, but are loath to speak out for fear of losing their jobs. �My goal is to stand before the California Legislature and address the Forest Service in a open forum,� says Robinson. �Forest Service personnel should be held criminally liable for what they have done.� END PIECE |
|
Posted by JohnA (61) Edit | RE: Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Posted: March 26, 2004 (12:27 PM) | There was posted here earlier a piece from Melbourne's Herald-Sun newspaper; the largest circulation newspaper in Australia. That piece no longer computes, except from cache.Here it is in the cached version: http://64.233.167.104/search Excerpts: quote>Australasian Fire Authorities Council chief executive and Country Fire Authority chairman Len Foster said the IL-76 could be included in the strategy. "The IL-76 is a very, very good firefighting aircraft," he said. "It would be quite possible, in an appropriate mix of aircraft, for it to play a role."/quote> Of course, it never did. Australia went on to suffer through its worst bushfire season since 1939, losing 400 homes in Canberra and the Southern Hemisphere's largest observatory, Mt. Stromlo, at a cost to Australia of AU$43m. Insurance coverage is being litigated as the Aussies were, according to Chubb Insurers, not covered. Australasian Fire Authorities Council (AFAC) is entitled to make the judgement on how good the Il-76 really is as it was featured at the Southern Hemisphere's largest airshow: AirShows DownUnder, during Yeltsin's term of office. AFAC took the aircraft to test at Zhukovsky later the same year. Canada absorbed any negative comments the US Forest Service threw at the IL-76 post-test in Farnborough, as written up in a 35-page review. Canada's firefighters have yet to see the Il-76 although they are quite aware of it. The rumor in British Columbia's fire holocaust of 2003 (Kelowna 250 homes+) was that when the IL-76 came up in conversation, BC civil servants would act quickly dismissive, tarnishing the Il-76. How could they know? They've never seen the Il-76. They could only know what to say if they were given ammo by the US Forest Service. |
|
Posted by JohnA (61) Edit | RE: Large firefighting aircraft: Boeing 747 supertanker tops IL-76 waterbomber ? Posted: May 17, 2004 (2:38 PM) | First appearance of IL-76 waterbomber and 747 supertanker in same article from the US' Firehouse.com: http://cms.firehouse.com/content/ar.onId=4&id=30430No representative of Global Emergency Response was sought out for comment. |
|
Main Forum Page | Start new Thread | Edit your AD | Search Forum Home | Book a Flight | Flight Prices | Special Offers! | Price Guarantee | Price a Flight | - Order Process | Calendar | Zero-G Flights | Gift Certificates | Hotels | Spb. HotelsWhy FlyMiG.Com? | Aircraft | In the Media | Contact Us | Questions | Flight Stories | About Us | MAKS 2003 | MAKS 2005 | Updates Avia X-change | Aviation Forum | Cool Stuff | Affiliates | Mail Lists | iPod | PostCards | Search | Links | Pilots
| Honda CRX Si | Manuals | | | Copyright © FlyMiG.Com 2002 - 2024 |