Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Neptune Aviation P2 down near Tooele, UT

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Ditto what AvBug said.... Ya don't build 1000's of hrs. flying strictly vfr...We (Tanker Pilots) are ALL ifr cert. and very comfortable flyin in the soup. Before things change.??? C'mon now, thats all we need, more beaurocratic b.s. / rules n regs..I think theres enough info on CFIT... Sure the P2V isn't "known ice" but I don't recall any reports of ice at the time, and I'm fairly certain that ice wasn't the culprit... I DO agree however that crew should've tightened up their CRM and discussed their escape routes if/when they did enter IMC...... My $.02


Well....unfortunately said...maybe we need more rules and Regs. I need 30 more years out of this business. If ******************** like this keeps happening...it's all gone.
 
Well....unfortunately said...maybe we need more rules and Regs. I need 30 more years out of this business. If ******************** like this keeps happening...it's all gone.


Uuhhh, well what MORE can they add about CFIT
DC-4..??? Pretty self-explanatory to me.. Like me too, you need another 30 outta aviation. I'm certain people will continue to fly for many more years than that, and mother earth will always burn somewhere.
Unfortunately your probably right though, indeed they will undoubtedly think of something more to add
 
Uuhhh, well what MORE can they add about CFIT
DC-4..??? Pretty self-explanatory to me.. Like me too, you need another 30 outta aviation. I'm certain people will continue to fly for many more years than that, and mother earth will always burn somewhere.
Unfortunately your probably right though, indeed they will undoubtedly think of something more to add

Uhhh...?

Inform yourself...Congress is trying to pass a bill right now that will allow MAFFS/ANG to deploy, without committing all contract resources, first. This bill has already passed the House...

Were you around in 2004?
 
Uhhh...?

Inform yourself...Congress is trying to pass a bill right now that will allow MAFFS/ANG to deploy, without committing all contract resources, first. This bill has already passed the House...

Were you around in 2004?

DC-4.. Uncle Sam is only considering the outflow COSTS of the firefighting industry when entertaining the idea of FIRST utilizing MAFFS/ANG prior to using contract companies... Even IF the bill passes, and is implemented, over time the quality and use of the MAFFS system will only be INaddition to the use of contract companies. Meaning he (UncleSam) will be spending the money for BOTH resources. I have worked with multiple MAFFS support teams over the years.. Oh and yes, I was around in '04, infact I've been in the Air Tanker industry since '65.
 
DC-4.. Uncle Sam is only considering the outflow COSTS of the firefighting industry when entertaining the idea of FIRST utilizing MAFFS/ANG prior to using contract companies... Even IF the bill passes, and is implemented, over time the quality and use of the MAFFS system will only be INaddition to the use of contract companies. Meaning he (UncleSam) will be spending the money for BOTH resources. I have worked with multiple MAFFS support teams over the years.. Oh and yes, I was around in '04, infact I've been in the Air Tanker industry since '65.[/QUOTE


Since you've been around since '65, you surely don't put anything past "Uncle Sam", espcially the USFS. Right?

There is no plan for the future of Aerial Firefighting. If we continue to do what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got. I don't think the FS, or any agency, will accept fatality rates that we've seen in the past.
 
DC-4.. Uncle Sam is only considering the outflow COSTS of the firefighting industry when entertaining the idea of FIRST utilizing MAFFS/ANG prior to using contract companies... Even IF the bill passes, and is implemented, over time the quality and use of the MAFFS system will only be INaddition to the use of contract companies. Meaning he (UncleSam) will be spending the money for BOTH resources. I have worked with multiple MAFFS support teams over the years.. Oh and yes, I was around in '04, infact I've been in the Air Tanker industry since '65.[/QUOTE


Since you've been around since '65, you surely don't put anything past "Uncle Sam", espcially the USFS. Right?

There is no plan for the future of Aerial Firefighting. If we continue to do what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got. I don't think the FS, or any agency, will accept fatality rates that we've seen in the past.

When was the last time the USFS actually had a plan for the future and forward looking ideas? It cant have been too recently.

Just seems like whenever someone gets to the upper levels of USFS, and the rest of the federal government for that matter, its about band-aid temp solutions and coasting onto retirement without making too big of waves.

While CDF, or Calfire I suppose now, may not perfect, it seems like they at least have some idea about where they want to be in the future and work towards that. Re-engining the S-2s was not cheap, but it was step to increase capabilities and keep them going into the future.
 
Again, it may be a little premature to call for regulations and talk about acceptable loss rates, particularly with the loss of T-42.

We don't know what happened or why it was lost, beyond that the flight terminated abruptly in a mountainside.

Tom Risk would be among the first to point out that such a mishap is a wake-up call to each of us, each and every time. If nothing else, it's a red flag that reminds us we're all mortal and that our known universe which is fine and well this second might not be the next. These times remind us to do all in our power to keep from becoming the next example.

That said, we don't know what happened. For those calling for greater regulation, exactly what do you intend to regulate? Make it illegal to strike a hillside in flight? Make it illegal to fly at low altitudes? Put in place requirements that we don't crash? No one is foolish enough to suggest such things...but that leaves us with nothing to regulate. We don't know why this mishap occured, and accordingly, inventing rules and regulations to address the unknown is a futile and idiotic endeavor.

Is the loss rate acceptable? It's never been acceptable, even if it's one aircraft, even if it's a single pilot in a SEAT. I appreciate it as much as the next guy (having, among other things in the fire business, seven seasons in SEATs, along with heavy tankers, air attack, and other roles)...and I appreciate it from the perspective of one who was on a hillside following an engine failure during an active fire just three short years ago. I was one of the stats...eight of us went down that season. What to do about it? We fly mechanical equipment into highly variable and unpredictable demanding environments, as you well know. Losses are never acceptable, but are also never a surprise.

No regulation is going to prevent me from striking a hillside. No amount of training will prevent it. All manner of legislation would be a wonderful addition, from the public safety officer's death benefits act to increased rates to operators for wages, training, maintenance, and of course, operations. We've seen innovative and gradual improvements ranging the gamut from duty restrictions to TCAS to AFF, and gone are the days when we'd fly all day, change cylinders all night, and then fly again the next morning. Communications have improved. Bases and facilities are better. But the truth is that no amount of regulation, no amount of legislation, no amount of paperwork will save the industry from the reality of unstable air and burning fuels and rock. It won't prevent incidents or mishaps, it won't bring back the dead, and it won't stop another valued soul from blending with terrain on a steep and rocky slope somewhere. It's going to happen again.

I'd prefer to see you leave speculation out of this thread. I'd prefer to see those who knew the deceased have something to say about their passing, and save the politics and unrelated rantings for another thread. A little respect is in order, because those who were lost will not only be missed, but will be missed by all of us who knew them, with a sad, but solemn respect. Let's not make this an opportunity to wave our favorite causes and flags. We've just lost some good men. Let that be enough.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top