Arizona Wildfire has Reached Kitt Peak's National Observatory

Kitt Peak National Observatory is home to over 24 telescopes with some of those now under threat from a large wildfire which began in the area on June 11 , the observatory has been evacuated and the fire is now said to have reached a ridge that holds four of the observatory's telescopes.

Twitter post from Amy Lowitz who works at the observatory.

Last frame before the webcam cut out at the VLBA antenna on Kitt Peak. This is the next one north from the 12m I use, and of course near all the other KP telescopes that 100s of other scientists use. All of the webcams I know of on KP are now down. Waiting & hoping for good news.

twitter.com...

The observatory was evacuated on Wednesday (June 15) after preparing the telescopes to be left on their own as concerns about the fire increased. On Thursday (June 16), firefighters covered key parts of the blaze with fire retardants and cleared vegetation around key observatory buildings in an attempt to protect them. Personnel also shut off power to the observatory early on Friday.

Firefighters working to contain the Contreras Fire are facing temperatures over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (40 degrees Celsius), as well as high winds and very dry grass and brush. The weekend may bring scattered showers that could help slow the blaze.
www.space.com...

Hopefully the work of the firefighters prevents any major damage and they all stay safe in the dangerous conditions.

a reply to: gortex

Forget the telescopes, those can be rebuilt.

I'm more concerned about people there, the forest and the animals. A fire like that kills hundred thousands of mammals, birds, reptiles and millions of insects including their habitat.

Let's not forget that.

I’ve been watching the air tankers working it. They’ve been working their ass off, but between terrain, weather, and how dry the forest is they’ve had a really hard time getting a foothold.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Just out of curiosity, is it those that skim the water with a upside down snorkel while flying to flood the tanks?

That's one tough job, saw a documentary on those guys. So much mental pressure, violent shaking and it's not like it is safe. Heros in heroic machines!

a reply to: TDDAgain

No, these were Bae 146s and two DC-10s. They operate out of Mesa and were going back and forth past where I was staying.

I remember a wildfire in New Mexico when I lived in Carlsbad - it almost reached the visitors' center at the Caverns, and afterwards, the whole area around it looked like a moonscape. It took the plant life a long time to recover.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Much appreciated answer!

I somehow had in my mind you used Flightradar or something like that. Even more impressed you know the models.

Noticed that the BAE 146 has top mounted wings, is that so the water that is dropped can not interfere with the aerodynamics? I come from a car related background, so I was thinking about that.

But then the DC-10 has low mounted wings, I figure it does not really matter?

a reply to: TDDAgain

I use ADS-B exchange to see when they’re getting close, then step out and snap pictures as they go by.

The wing position doesn’t really play a role outside of aerodynamics. The 146 and C-130 are high wing, the DC-10 and MD-87 are low. The MD-87 is a bit trickier as a tanker though. They’re required by the FAA to perform all drops with their gear down due to the stall characteristics.

a reply to: Zaphod58

They’re required by the FAA to perform all drops with their gear down due to the stall characteristics.

Why that? I know from simulator game that gear down means drag and for the smaller fighter jets, change of balance.

Is it so it's already deployed for emergency landing after such a stall? I figure when that happens flying so low, there's no time to deploy the gear or it has to work the 1st time. Glide and land / crash directly but at least have the gear down?

Or is it because of "dirty" air from the gear that leads to better stall characteristics? Hopefully you don't mind me asking such strange questions. Just trying to understand the info you gave me.

a reply to: TDDAgain

The MD series has…. Interesting post stall characteristics. By requiring them to be gear down to drop, it requires them to be slow, which means they’ll deploy flaps to at least flaps 1 or 5, and leading edge slats, both of which improve slow speed handling and decrease the chance of a stall.

a reply to: TDDAgain

Sorry for the random double post. My phone has a mind of its own on ATS. I edited in the answer to your last question.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh so it's a measurement that enforces other adaptions to flight mode that ultimately make it safe(r)?

Like instead of commanding "do this and that and this and that" they say: "Water shed approach must have landing gear down" and all the other things fall into place naturally because of that. That's a clever way to make sure every necessary flight adaption is really executed.


Like, IDK. Bad example but saying: APU must be on in this or that situation. But it isn't the APU really, it's the battery or a sub system of the APU that is needed.


Add: Nothing to be sorry about. I say it happens to the best, even mods

poor forest management.

stupid environmentalists.

a reply to: TDDAgain

Exactly. The Boeing 717 started life as an MD-9X (either 96 or 97). After the merger with Boeing it became the 717 to fill a “hole” in their commercial aircraft numbering. There’s a video of a nice, straightforward stall test on YouTube that I can post later, that goes terrifyingly wrong. They pull the nose up into a stall, it breaks exactly like it’s supposed to, and suddenly they’re on their back looking at ground. Fortunately there were two highly experienced test pilots on board, and they were at high altitude.

a reply to: Zaphod58
The video reads interesting, take you time though no haste, I won't fly away.

How exciting, since I don't know if it got inverted or rolled, I just try to figure out reasons for both with my very limited knowledge about airplanes.

Recently I discovered that it is very interesting. I always thought planes are planes... they fly and have everything redundant was my knowledge. But there is so much more technical stuff that is going on and reasons to mess up.

a reply to: sarahvital

Why do you think that? Forest management has proven to be counter productive in the long term and planned forest are not healthy at all.

Are you talking about minor management like cutting the electric trusses free of branches? That's necessary of course. But a forest does not need to be managed. It's only managed by humans because of the $.

When new forest are laid out, that's already in the back of the heads. The most healthy forest is the one that is just left alone. Around ten years ago I thought about doing the hunting license tests but I ended up in forest care instead. And that care is mostly documenting, that's where I learned the above.

The good news today is it was a lot cooler, and quite a bit of rain is moving through. The bad news is it included a lot of lightning, and one particularly nasty thunderstorm that dumped hail and strong winds in the area.

a reply to: TDDAgain

Here's the 717 stall test.



Here's a test MD-80 landing gone wrong. Believe it or not it was repaired and flew until the early 2000s before finally being retired and scrapped.



To show what these guys have been doing the last few days, these are not from the Contreras Fire, but these are the same aircraft types, and some of the same aircraft that were working the fire.

Language in this video-

a reply to: Zaphod58
That was very interesting!
Okay so they got into a stall, probably one of the wings stalled first making them roll? Terrifying.

I watched a few of crash analysis videos. Mentour pilot has a real good channel. Very informative, good delivery. I watch his channel sometimes.

How close that RJ85 get's to the ground! I wouldn't want to be in that cockpit nor on the ground. What a funny name for a place where mostly male pilots sit, though. "cockpit". I figure that roosterpit was too obvious

The news appears good for the observatory. Four non scientific buildings burned, but it appears that the domes survived intact. Defensive lines are around the surviving buildings. The fire spread to 17,646 acres with 0% containment.