Jump to content

      













Photo

Forest Fires


  • Please log in to reply
341 replies to this topic

#41 Benezet

Benezet
  • Member
  • 982 posts

Posted 30 August 2013 - 08:20 PM

"There will never be another aircraft that can kill a wildfire like the Mars with its ability to directly attack fire with a pay load of 27,000 litres."

I love the Mars but a DC10 tanker has a payload of 45,000 litres.


:-) Nonetheless, it takes a little bit longer than 45 seconds to fill the DC10....

#42 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 1,656 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 07:23 AM

"There will never be another aircraft that can kill a wildfire like the Mars with its ability to directly attack fire with a pay load of 27,000 litres."

I love the Mars but a DC10 tanker has a payload of 45,000 litres.


They both have their time and place, but it's really an apples-to-oranges comparison. One drops water (sometimes mixed with foam) and is at its best cycling quickly between a lake and a fire, while the other drops retardant, and has to go back to a suitable airport to reload/(refuel?) between drops. Two loads out of the Mars (depending on how close you are to water - I suppose it could be as little as 8 minutes) and you've already dropped more than the -10 can in one; I can't see the DC doing 8 minute turns....
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

#43 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:04 AM

On Sprout Lake in 2008



#44 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 8,572 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 06:51 PM

They both have their time and place, but it's really an apples-to-oranges comparison. One drops water (sometimes mixed with foam) and is at its best cycling quickly between a lake and a fire, while the other drops retardant, and has to go back to a suitable airport to reload/(refuel?) between drops. Two loads out of the Mars (depending on how close you are to water - I suppose it could be as little as 8 minutes) and you've already dropped more than the -10 can in one; I can't see the DC doing 8 minute turns....


Yeah I was just pointing out the fact the DC10 could carry more than the Mars, which in the article made it sound like the Mars had the biggest capacity.

There is no question that if the Mars had a suitable water source close by a fire they could certainly lay down more water in a given period than the 10 could. The DC10 also can use plain water or retardant. It takes the 10 about 15 minutes to reload.

I still love the Mars, beautiful aircraft.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#45 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:25 PM

Yeah I was just pointing out the fact the DC10 could carry more than the Mars, which in the article made it sound like the Mars had the biggest capacity.

There is no question that if the Mars had a suitable water source close by a fire they could certainly lay down more water in a given period than the 10 could. The DC10 also can use plain water or retardant. It takes the 10 about 15 minutes to reload.

I still love the Mars, beautiful aircraft.


Yeah, the Mars is a real piece of history and quite a phenom. But it no longer has the biggest capacity - as mentioned, the DC-10 bests it, as does the Ilyushin Il-76, and the biggest of all, the Evergreen Supertanker 747, which carries a whopping 78,000 L of water or retardant.

http://en.wikipedia....al_firefighting

But the Mars hasn't really been part of BC's fire suppression strategy for a while, though it has looked good on TV during the odd appearance. It was slow, not very agile, and required a large body of water near a fire to be useful. The main planes used currently are Lockheed Electra L-188s and Convair 580s, as well as small planes like Air Tractor 802s. Their speed, maneuverability, safety and dependability are all far superior to the Mars, as well as having much lower operating costs.

Perhaps now that BC is passing on the last operational Mars, an agency with more lakes might be interesed, like Ontario or Saskatchewan? Or it will finally be retired and go to a museum, like its brethren before it.

#46 HB

HB
  • Banned
  • 7,975 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 12:17 AM

It could come in handy for tranferring Orca Whales from one aquarium to another like they did with Tillikum

#47 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 1,656 posts

Posted 01 September 2013 - 05:01 PM

It was slow, not very agile, and required a large body of water near a fire to be useful. The main planes used currently are Lockheed Electra L-188s and Convair 580s, as well as small planes like Air Tractor 802s. Their speed, maneuverability, safety and dependability are all far superior to the Mars, as well as having much lower operating costs.

Perhaps now that BC is passing on the last operational Mars, an agency with more lakes might be interesed, like Ontario or Saskatchewan? Or it will finally be retired and go to a museum, like its brethren before it.


As you've noted, there are several 'problems' with operating the Mars, all of which argue against her continued use. There are a few other factors as well - one of which is fuel. Getting avgas in sufficient quantities is becoming more difficult, as is actually getting it out to the aircraft while she is moored on a lake. I can't imagine that there are many spare parts available for the engines either...

Ontario is doing quite well with its fleet of CL-415s, and Saskatchewan has a mixed fleet of 6 Cl-215/215Ts, 4 Convairs, and 3 Trackers. Manitoba just bought a fleet of 4 CL415s to replace our 215s, which were getting long-in-the-tooth, and harder to maintain.
Those 3 agencies are all moving forward in time with turbine powered machinery - it makes no sense to move backward to what is becoming, more and more, an anachronism.

While it is wonderful to hear (what a *GLORIOUS* sound!) and see the Mars fly, I fear that her time is drawing to an end.
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

#48 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 02 May 2014 - 09:25 PM

The 2014 fire season is underway. After a burst of activity in mid-April in the Okanagan, things have quieted down again somewhat with cooler weather and low-elevation greenup.

 

The climatologists have this year shaping into an El Nino year; some research suggests that those are associated with above-average fire seasons.

 

So far there have been just over 100 fires and nearly 800 hectares burned this year; not breaking any records yet, but the season is just starting.

 

http://bcwildfire.ca.../Statistics.asp



#49 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 09:40 PM

Not sure if people are following or interested, but the fire season has picked up dramatically in BC the past week. We jumped from about 6,000 hectares burned total a week ago to a bit over 100,000 hectares burned now. This doesn't quite compare to the Northwest Territories, who are having a crazy fire season, with roughly 1,000,000 ha burned so far and the driest conditions they've seen in decades.

Most of the large fires in BC are in the north and fairly remote, but fires in the southern interior are also picking up and threatening various values. BC has imported crews or other resources (aircraft, pumps, etc.) from several different provinces. This could be a long and smokey fire season.



#50 HB

HB
  • Banned
  • 7,975 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 10:56 PM

http://cwfis.cfs.nrc...ay=17&year=2014

 

Check out al the current fires on the interactive mep


Edited by History Buff, 17 July 2014 - 11:08 PM.


#51 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 10,148 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 06:33 AM

^ Geezus, cool map with scary information. Thanks for that HB.



#52 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 8,624 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 07:24 AM

Big fire (7,000 ha) in Banff National Park right now.



#53 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 21,166 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 08:05 AM

And yet every night on the news when the weather forecast called for above normal temperatures and no sign of rain for the past few weeks everyone was so delighted. Be careful what you wish for I guess.


  • sebberry likes this

#54 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 08:59 PM

The 2014 fire season may not be over yet, but it is certainly winding down (friends at a fire camp up north told me it was -12 out this morning as they got out of the tent...brrr.).

 

BC has had 1344 fires this year, which is below the long-term average.

Area burned this year has totalled 338,708 ha. This is a very high number - higher than the burned area in 2010, 2009 or 2003 (the most expensive and damaging fire seasons in the past decade or so) and higher than any year in the 1990s.

 

The largest single incident was the Chelaslie RIver fire, south of Burns Lake and in Entiako and Tweedsmuir Prov. Parks, which is more than 130,000 ha, one of the largest fires ever recorded in BC:

842014~121750_IMG_0747.JPG


  • Mike K. likes this

#55 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 09:16 PM

Oh yeah, and the official total area burned for the NWT this year is 3,387,066 hectares. Yep, 10 times what we burned in BC this year.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=HP9WXk9frmM



#56 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,519 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 11 September 2014 - 04:06 AM

From the 1344 fires this year how many were started by people and how many by other factors (lighting, etc.) ?


Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#57 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 06:16 AM

From the 1344 fires this year how many were started by people and how many by other factors (lighting, etc.) ?

802 lightning fires

537 human caused fires

 

The remaining few are as yet unclassified (could be under investigation, or just haven't been entered in the database yet)



#58 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,519 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 11 September 2014 - 07:07 AM

802 lightning fires

537 human caused fires

 

The remaining few are as yet unclassified (could be under investigation, or just haven't been entered in the database yet)

 

What is the primary cause of human caused fires? (i.e. camping?)


Edited by MarkoJ, 11 September 2014 - 07:07 AM.

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#59 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 07:33 AM

There are quite a few human causes that are not uncommon ways of starting wildfires 

 

-Abandoned campfires (depending on their potential for spread, often these are not considered 'fires', but sometimes they are)

-ATV and off-road vehicles (hot exhaust pipes, etc.)

-open burning (farmers, ranchers, rural landowners burning debris on their land; this is sometimes legal, sometimes not)

-logging, forestry work, land clearing, other resource work involving hot engines, welders, etc.

-railroads (sparks from their brakes)

-vehicle fires along roadsides

-arson, fireworks, discarded cigarettes, and other negligent or criminal incendiary activities

 

Most years there are quite a few in each of these categories.



#60 eseedhouse

eseedhouse
  • Member
  • 1,288 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 12:06 PM

What is the primary cause of human caused fires? (i.e. camping?)

 

People.



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


To advertise on VibrantVictoria, call us at 250-884-0589.