Cabotage averted vs. lives lost

[Vladimir Lenin]

Looks like our comrades to the East offered to help, but Uncle Sam won't have any of it

linky

 

[sky37d]

Beriev also makes a tanker, that's a sea plane, and they won't use that either.
water bomber
Kind of like a really big, fast, PBY.
Don't understand it, at all. Martin Mars is a huge water bomber, but like the article states, they won't use Canadian planes.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

http://www.beriev.com/ [/B

pretty neat planes

well, not for the developed world anyway

how would FBOs collect their landing fees

 

[EagleRJ]

So, the capitalist swines are looking at the newest piece of glorious Soviet technology with envy?

I think it's more likely that like the article says, an aircraft that big can't fight fires in the moutains. It's not maneuverable enough. Sure, it carries a lot of water, but it can't meter it or make several drops one one fill. Like the guy says- 11,000 gallons of water on one 3/4 mile pass is overkill, and I'm sure it costs a fortune to operate.

Speaking of the Martin Mars, are they still running those? That was a big airplane!

 

[avbug]

If Canadian tankers aren't used in the United States, why does LA county have two of them?? They've had them for years.

Don't believe everything you hear. The article is garbage; mistruths and falsehoods. So was most of what appeared in the media.

I've dropped in Canada, and worked alongside Canadians dropping in the US. What claptrap.

As for the IL76, it's not approved for use here, and is a little impractical. Anyone who has ever flown into a fire will immediately understand that.

Air tankers are there to support ground troops, not to put out fires. We control them, direct them, reinforce ground work, etc. But going direct on a fire is often a very bad idea.

Add to that the wisdom of flying turbojet engines in heavy smoke with large burning objects flying about, the inability to use most tanker bases due to ramp weight and runway required, and the inability to fly in the tight quarters required for drop work, as well as performing downhill drops and canyon work, and the lack of qualified crews to fly such an aircraft...there aren't any valid reasons to bring it over.

The aircraft has been in George for the past year undergoing trials, but right now the twenty five million dollar price tag means that we could field 50 DC-4's for the same rate, with much better coverage. Or twenty five Type IV tankers (SEATs), etc.

Don't be so quick to glob onto trash media coverage, for that's all this article is.

I was rather dismayed in the media hype about homes lost and body counts that the first two fatalities of these fires were never mentioned; the two crewmembers of T-99 who were lost responding to them in the first place. Ironic, isn't it?