would air tankers have saved 19 arizona firefighters killed

Yet an ABC News investigation has found that even as the number of forest fires has dramatically increased over the last decade, officials in Washington have allowed the fleet of large firefighting tankers to dramatically decrease by 75 percent from the 44 planes available just a decade ago. Today, only 11 air tankers are available.

would air tankers have saved 19 arizona firefighters killed

10 years ago the number of firefighter aircraft numbered 44, Not really as much as needed in my opinion, but now there only eleven. Wiki says otherwise so I don't that's up to date. But even adding the 23 to eleven still leaves the country vulnerable to wildfires. This much is obvious.

In the United States, most of these aircraft are privately owned and contracted to government agencies, and the National Guard and the U.S. Marines also maintain fleets of firefighting aircraft. On May 10, 2004, The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announced that they were cancelling contracts with operators of 33 heavy airtankers. They cited liability concerns and an inability to safely manage the fleet after the wing failure and resulting crash of a C-130A Hercules in California and a PB4Y-2 in Colorado during the summer of 2002. Both aged aircraft broke up in flight due to catastrophic fatigue cracks at the wing roots. After subsequent third-party examination and extensive testing of all USFS contracted heavy airtankers, three companies were awarded contracts and now maintain a combined fleet of 23 aircraft.

Remember, almost all of the firefighting aircraft have prior service life before they are retro-fitted for this type of service. So they are already starting out long in the tooth.

USAF and USARNG aircraft are often used as back-up, but they can only be allocated so much due to budget constraints and the stresses of the mission. Which leads back to budgets as these missions are maintenance intensive.



People seem to think that these aircraft is the answer, and maybe it is for rolling hills or flatter terrain, but I don't think they would that useful in mountainous territory.





This is a issue that has quietly bit us in the @$$, while the Government spends our tax dollars on all sorts of other pork projects that really do not have much impact on anyone.

This article could also belong in the Fragile Earth or maybe the Aircraft Projects forums, but I thought it fit all three so here it is.

reply to post by TDawgRex


The MAFFS aircraft are only allowed to be used when all other Forestry Service tankers are in use, and all other options have been used. They can be used any time, regardless of budget, since they can take the money from the USFS budget and transfer it to the unit in question. But all other options have to be exercised.

I posted a thread with this video in it before, but here it is again. It's MAFFS 6 in California flying the fire there.

reply to post by Zaphod58


My apologies, see what you get for wandering away from the aircraft Projects forum? I realize that they are both different forums, but still the same story. How do I get the Mods to shoot this one down?

Contact them direct or just hope one wanders by, says "That's oddly familiar" and trashes it?

I had to give your thread a S&F, sort of as a apology. I hate getting beat.

reply to post by TDawgRex


Just wait, and if they decide to close it down they will.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is the thread I did about it. The MAFFS video is totally unrelated to this, just a cool video.

I really have to get that INS unit looked at though. I keep ending up away from the Aircraft forum. I think it has too much drift in it.