Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

MAFFS C-130H down in South Dakota

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
A Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System (MAFFS) C-130H (tail number 92-1445 from the NC ANG) fighting the White Draw Fire in southwest South Dakota has crashed while on a drop. There is no word on the cause, or the three crew members, who were transported to the Rapid City Regional Hospital.

The MAFFS system has proven invaluable, as it can dispense up to 3,000 gallons of fire retardant or water, in less than 5 seconds, and can be refilled in under 12 minutes. There have been 8 MAFFS equipped C-130s helping to fight the fires in Colorado, and other areas in the Rockies. Four of the eight are from the Wyoming and North Carolina ANG. They will be moving to the Wyoming ANG base in Cheyenne to minimize reload time.

There are several videos at the source here. Updates will be posted as they become available.




posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
The Air Force has announced that the other seven MAFFS equipped C-130s are grounded for the time being.

There are reports that the aircraft that crashed was carrying a crew of six,at least three were taken to the hospital, and I have seen unconfirmed reports that at least one is confirmed to have died. Some reports say that three were taken by helicopter, and some say a fourth was taken by ground ambulance. According to military and and Law Enforcement in South Dakota, there were three survivors. They were on their second run of the day.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Hoping the best for the ANG crew.

Only in the slightest off-topic, but I'm annually surprised that with the wildfires in the West and the aging civilian fleet contracted by the USFS more isn't being done to increase the use of MAFFS/ANG equipment.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


This is NOT the video from the OP, but it is a video of a firefighting C-130 losing a wing.

I think this has happened a few times. The firefighting pilots are truly heros, and this is the absolute toughest flying there is on the planet. It is hard on pilots and aircraft alike. There are updrafts, downdrafts, extremely heavy and unstable payload.

I can't see the video from work, it is blocked, but I think this is the right one...

edit on 2-7-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


There was legislation introduced that would require the reactivation of the spare MAFFS II unit, and the 8 older MAFFS I units. The MAFFS I can't be used on the C-130J, but would increase the total number of available aircraft to 17. The Air National Guard has been against having to assign more of what are considered warfighting assets to fighting fires.

The same legislation would also restrict the use of foreign air tankers, which personally I think is insane. They would have to certify to Congress that all MAFFS units were in use, or were insufficient to fighting the fire. On June 6th, the Forest Service had hired a CV-580 from Canada to assist, but hadn't activated either DC-10. On June 11th, they activated the Call When Needed contract on one DC-10, and borrowed three more CV-580s. There is also a British made, Canadian owned, BAe-146 that was converted to an air tanker in use by Neptune Aviation, with a contract for two more later this year.

MAFFS I reactivation



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
well it does show that american planes are crappy firefighters and keep crashing..Like the F-22 craptor that loves to poison and kill its own pilots.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think this is the one you linked.



This was a C-130A in June of 2003 in California. There was also a C-130A crash in France in 2000. Most waterbombers in use are old WWII or 1960s era aircraft. They are put through some brutal maneuvers, and a lot of wear and tear. They have been grounded several times due to crashes.

The family of Lieutenant Colonel Paul Mikeal, 42, have confirmed that he was killed in the crash yesterday. The Air Force has yet to release any names of the crew, or any of their conditions, but his family says that they were notified at 2-230 in the morning by the Air Force. His mother-in-law confirmed that she was with her daughter when she was notified, but they couldn't say more.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mkgandhas
 



Really? You REALLY felt it necessary to post that in this thread? You have GOT to be kidding me.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I just did some additional reading. What a mess. To have the assets just sitting there because there is no will to fix the issue.
The ANG is a perfect instrument for expanding the fleet safely. The infrastructure already exists, and the airframes are safe. I'm not sure what operating the C-130's costs, but I can't imagine that cost is any greater than contracting private airframes. And while I'm sure that putting aside 30 or so airframes for six months of the year would be trying, I'm not sure it would be crippling to the air trans fleet.
I completely understand the DoD's reluctance here. I'd probably make the same arguments from under that "hat", but this is a case where it could and should be bent under political will -- if only that existed.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
u can rest assured that they will get the UTMOST TOP TREATMENT,, by a very grateful, Community,,
i even say kids running out too Police men in there cars with Bottles of water/coffee/food/snacks,,
they do care.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


I agree. Mod the MAFFS I units into IIs if you can. Scrap them and get IIs if you can't, and have them standing by. They are modular roll on roll off units, so you won't have the aircraft just sitting around doing nothing when it's not fire season. It wouldn't take but a few hours to install them and have the aircraft ready to go, a day at the most. But by having the extra units available, you have more aircraft available when these giant fires get out of hand. The MAFFS units have been in use for something like 40 years, and this is the first crash to happen to any MAFFS equipped aircraft.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


You don't even have to scrap the MAFFS I equipment. You can use it on H's still in service with the ANG and save the wear and tear on the new J's.
And it is a RO/RO mod. MAFFS I takes four to six hours. MAFFS II installation apparently takes less than four hours -- and has been done in as little as one hour! The wait is 24-48 hrs for the bureaucracy to catch up with the initial phone call.
It seems relatively simple (sitting comfortably behind my desk) to fund this mission. No doubt AMC would have to be allayed by allocating additional funding (and even airframes if necessary) to free up a handful of ANG airframes/crew for this mission. Too bad Aero Union went under and they can't make more MAFFS units.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


I'm sure they can find someone that can produce something similar to the current MAFFS system. But all they would need to do is train a handful of crews from different bases, just like they do now, and free up the handful of airframes that would be needed as necessary. They would rarely need to use all of their units, so most of them would be a backup. This is the first time I've heard of them having 8 airframes in use at the same time. But it's good to have backups, just in case. If they had more than the handful they have now, they might have gotten the Colorado fires contained faster.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


"They would rarely need to use all of their units,"
famous last words,,in any war.
and make no mistake. uncontrolled fire spreading,,is a war.

get **********************CONGRESS too DECLARE WAR !!!!!!!!!!
on that fire.
might free up some resources.
edit on 2-7-2012 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by BobAthome
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


"They would rarely need to use all of their units,"
famous last words,,in any war.
and make no mistake. uncontrolled fire spreading,,is a war.

get **********************CONGRESS too DECLARE WAR !!!!!!!!!!
on that fire.
might free up some resources.
edit on 2-7-2012 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)


Actually, that would work!


Declaring a war, or declaring a state of emergency, or declaring a disaster area, those are all pretty equivalent, and they do free up a lot of resources. At least the fire is tangible, and we'll know when we have won! Makes much more sense than a war on drugs or poverty.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


as we say here,,kinda like practice for the big leauges



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


Of course it is. But the USAF has a total of eight MAFFS units, and this is only the third time since 2006 that all 8 units have been in use at the same time, and the first since 2008. If they were to have more than 8 units, then they would have extra just in case another fire were to pop up unexpectedly.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

I hope they are getting enough rest between shifts. Thank you for helping fight the fires. I know they saved our area last year. I hope the rain and snow come early this year. I am ready for another Ice Age. I am sorry for their loss of life.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


so where are thre GRUNTS,,i know its AIRFORCE and they are co-ordinating well, with fire-fighters,,and what little ground force's,,,
ground forces,, still called grunts?

and i noticed a Bird Col. mentioned the ground forces,, for 5 seconds,, in his 5 minute interview,, no offence Col.
,,
America does have ground forces right?
u know Air/Army/Marines/ Co-ordinated since,,,????
edit on 2-7-2012 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The Army National Guard has sent units to assist, both on the ground, and using helicopters from the air.

The father-in-law of Col Mikeal has said that the family was informed that only two crew members survived the crash. Several sources have said that the injuries are serious. The USFS has confirmed that there were two survivors, both were airlifted to the hospital.

This is a picture of the aircraft that crashed, not sure when it was taken.


The President had this to say:


Yesterday, a military C-130 from the North Carolina Air National Guard crashed while supporting firefighting efforts in South Dakota. The full details are still under investigation, but the crew of this flight — along with their families and loved ones — are in our thoughts and prayers. The men and women battling these terrible fires across the West put their lives on the line every day for their fellow Americans. The airmen who attack these fires from above repeatedly confront dangerous conditions in an effort to give firefighters on the ground a chance to contain these wildfires — to save homes, businesses, schools, and entire communities. They are heroes who deserve the appreciation of a grateful nation. I know Americans across the country share my concern for the well-being of the surviving members of the crew and my deep condolences to the families of those who lost their lives. And I know that Americans join me in expressing my deepest gratitude for the selfless determination they and thousands of men and women involved in this fight in states across the country demonstrate every day.

www.airforcetimes.com...
edit on 7/2/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join