BritBike Forum logo
BritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorBritBike Sponsor SteadfastCyclesBritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorBritBike SponsorHepolite PistonsBritBike SponsorBritBike Sponsor
Upgrade to: Gold Membership | Premium Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Words from our sponsors..
Vintage Motorcycle Auctioneers!
Vintage Motorcycle Auctioneers

CLICK HERE to see VIDEO
How the Electric Roller Starter works.

ORDER on eBay. CLICK HERE!
Buy your Electric Roller Starter here
ShoutChat Box
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments.
Buy BritBike staff a coffee
Buy BritBike's staff a coffeeStill here since 1996 serving BritBike enthusiasts..
Search eBay for motorcycle parts in following countries
Australia, Canada, France, Holland, Italy, United Kingdom, USA
Random Gallery photo
Member Spotlight
Zackybilly1
Zackybilly1
Picayune, MS
Posts: 457
Joined: January 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Newest Members
Bud O, knobby, coomo, Chris mannifield, ruellarobson
11024 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
franko 138
DavidP 74
koan58 62
Rohan 61
Popular Topics(Views)
1,154,845 mail-order LSR
a word from..
Forum Statistics
Forums35
Topics68,995
Posts691,410
Members11,024
Most Online14,755
May 5th, 2019
Who's Online Now
65 registered members (AML), 2,606 guests, and 985 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Bushfires , water bombing and fire management #795100 01/07/20 9:09 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
It appears that the previous thread covering this has been pulled.
This is a shame but there are rules & I was probably right up the top of the rule benders.
It is very hard to self moderate what one writes when one is passonate about what is being written and peoples lives are being lost or destroyed.

Unfortunately the thread ending up on the subject of waterbombing as a simple , easy & effective means of bushfie control .
I will not say anything more but simply direct you to one of the publications produced by the Volunteer Fire Fighters themselves.
This is one set of arguments about the relative merits of the various techniques deployed.

You may like to follow the links or even subscribe to the publication if you want to get information that has not been filtered by news teams for whatever reason those teams would choose to filter it.

Volunteer Fire fighters journal

And for thoe who are transfixed by the images of red goo coming out of aircraft
This link is to the organization that co-ordinates the air resources for the entire country on a year to year basis
Worth looking at if for no other reason than printing out the pretty poster of last years fleet.
National Aerial Firefighting Center

And for those whose valuable & considered contributions have been tossed into the cyper garbage bin, an apology .

Last edited by BSA_WM20; 01/07/20 9:15 pm.

Bike Beesa
Trevor
Support Your #1 BritBike Forum!

Check out British motorcycles for sale:
British Motorcycles on e-Bay UK
British motorcycles on e-Bay North America
CLICK HERE to see VIDEO
How the Electric Roller Starter works.


ORDER on eBay. CLICK HERE!

Buy your Electric Roller Starter here
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795101 01/07/20 9:26 pm
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
D
Dibnah Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by BSA_WM20
It appears that the previous thread covering this has been pulled.
This is a shame but there are rules & I was probably right up the top of the rule benders.
It is very hard to self moderate what one writes when one is passonate about what is being written and peoples lives are being lost or destroyed.

Unfortunately the thread ending up on the subject of waterbombing as a simple , easy & effective means of bushfie control .
I will not say anything more but simply direct you to one of the publications produced by the Volunteer Fire Fighters themselves.
This is one set of arguments about the relative merits of the various techniques deployed.

You may like to follow the links or even subscribe to the publication if you want to get information that has not been filtered by news teams for whatever reason those teams would choose to filter it.

Volunteer Fire fighters journal

And for thoe who are transfixed by the images of red goo coming out of aircraft
This link is to the organization that co-ordinates the air resources for the entire country on a year to year basis
Worth looking at if for no other reason than printing out the pretty poster of last years fleet.
National Aerial Firefighting Center

And for those whose valuable & considered contributions have been tossed into the cyper garbage bin, an apology .


Accepted.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: Dibnah] #795106 01/07/20 10:21 pm
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
S
Shane in Oz Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
S
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
Originally Posted by Dibnah
Accepted.
Stirrer wink

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795127 01/08/20 12:08 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,891
gavin eisler Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,891
Shame it was pulled, my heart goes out to the whole country, unimaginable here. its psihin down.


71 Devimead, John Hill, John Holmes A65 750
56 Norbsa 68 Longstroke A65
Cagiva Raptor 650
MZ TS 250
The poster formerly known as Pod
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795137 01/08/20 12:49 am
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 583
N
NickL Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
N
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by BSA_WM20
It appears that the previous thread covering this has been pulled.
This is a shame but there are rules & I was probably right up the top of the rule benders.
It is very hard to self moderate what one writes when one is passonate about what is being written and peoples lives are being lost or destroyed.

Unfortunately the thread ending up on the subject of waterbombing as a simple , easy & effective means of bushfie control .
I will not say anything more but simply direct you to one of the publications produced by the Volunteer Fire Fighters themselves.
This is one set of arguments about the relative merits of the various techniques deployed.

You may like to follow the links or even subscribe to the publication if you want to get information that has not been filtered by news teams for whatever reason those teams would choose to filter it.

Volunteer Fire fighters journal

And for thoe who are transfixed by the images of red goo coming out of aircraft
This link is to the organization that co-ordinates the air resources for the entire country on a year to year basis
Worth looking at if for no other reason than printing out the pretty poster of last years fleet.
National Aerial Firefighting Center

And for those whose valuable & considered contributions have been tossed into the cyper garbage bin, an apology .




Very well put Trevor.
Shame the people who control funds etc don't ever read articles like that.
That's of course, if they can read????

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795141 01/08/20 1:22 am
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
Keep that up Nick & this thread will get pulled as well
It is one of the little problems we have with out inherited Westminister system of government.
Unlike the USA where the RFS commissioner would need to be voted into his $ 452,000 / pa plus benefits job.
In Oz of course his position is at the whim of the Premier .
So just as long as the Premier is happy then he keeps his job regardless of how well he is doing it.


Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: Shane in Oz] #795146 01/08/20 3:46 am
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
Originally Posted by Shane in Oz
Originally Posted by Dibnah
Accepted.
Stirrer wink


Wondered what he said.
Added him to the banned list yesterday.
So what ever drivel he posts I will no longer see it.
Thinking back I was probably being baited.
When some one has nothing worthwhile to contribute it is a waste of time reading their posts.
So Dibnah sits along side with Konan, another waste of time.

OTOH it was good to find out there is only 1 747 in operation and the USA FAA is trying to ground it like it did with the other 2.
Only 2 737's both being managed Coulson Avaiation,
I would have thought there would have been a lot more, apparently these are the first 2 of the 6 1994 737B's they bought 2nd hand from Southwest Airlines and expect to have 2 more finished by this time next year.
Apparently there is better than 100 C 130's all bought 2nd hand from variously militaries so all with big hours which explains the very high lease fees as they would all have a very limited service life remaining.
IT was also interesting to dive into the histories of the companies who lease out fire fighting aircraft, much more profitable than taking bums from Sydney to LA & all very second hand planes with a lot fewer staff.

Last edited by BSA_WM20; 01/08/20 4:25 am.

Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795147 01/08/20 6:41 am
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
D
Dibnah Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
More 747

https://www.wired.com/2009/09/evergreen-supertanker/

“This aircraft can lay down a three-mile-long, football field-wide swath of retardant if needed,”

30 minute turnaround time, ability to operate at night and at a greater height than the smaller aircraft. Perhaps 8 drops a day, a 10 aircraft fleet would deal with the 1000 mile front in perhaps six days.

Baiting? No, merely offering an opinion, is that forbidden?

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: Dibnah] #795152 01/08/20 8:29 am
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
S
Shane in Oz Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
S
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
I don't think that would be anywhere near enough for a eucalyptus forest fire.
The problem is that eucalypts turn their leaves side-on, so the retardant would only hit the leading edge and not be much more effective than plain water.

90,000 litres is 90 m^3. Spread over that area (30m x 4800 m, 144, 000 square metres) gives less than 1 litre per square metre.
One of the firefighters interviewed on the wireless a couple of days ago claimed it would need 200 mm (8") of rain over a week to put the fires out, but let's be generous and say it only needs 1" (25mm) in a rapid fall.
A cubic metre is 1,000 litres, so 1 litre would cover a square metre to a depth of 1mm, which is at least an order of magnitude too low.

Unfortunately, fires need to be drowned or starved. Starving them needs a suitably long and wide area with next to no fuel, which is what back-burning is intended to achieve. The RFS has been using their water bombers reasonably effectively in rugged terrain to stop back-burning operations from getting away very often, so the 747s may well be quite effective in that capacity.
Burning onto a well maintained firebreak is also very effective, if only the firebreaks were well maintained...

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795155 01/08/20 11:11 am
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,921
Ob1quixote Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,921
Around here, the USFS does prescribed burns to reduce the flammable leaf litter on the forest floor. The burns are done in the proper season, when winds and humidity levels do not allow the low level fires to ignite the trees and forest canopy.

The local ecological concerns seem to understand the overall benefit, and concentrate their efforts on other issues. Unlike their Left Coast comrades, who block prescribed burns and other forest management techniques.


When singing "Kung Fu Fighting" is outlawed, only outlaws will sing "Kung Fu Fighting"
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795207 01/08/20 10:04 pm
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
D
Dibnah Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
The operation of pure water and retardant is not directly comparable, although the end goal is the same e.g. fire retardant can limit combustibility on an enduring basis. Increase the drop rate to 90,000 litres over two miles and a fleet of 10 off 747s still munches through the 1000 mile front in a few days. Round the clock tonnage war.

Or tinker at the margins and let it burn as currently.

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795210 01/08/20 10:29 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
The problem with Euclyupt forests is most grow very quickly.
So what happens is new trees shoot up right next to the old ones.
Most euclyupts have all their leaves right up the top so you have a 40 + foot of trunk then the very volatile canopy.
On mature trees their trunks are quite fire resistant , the bark chars a bit or just falls off & they sprout new leaves directly off the trunk
What happens with regrowth tress is they form a ladder for fire on the forest floor to take the fire from the understory shrubs directly up into the canopy.
A canopy fire can not be extinguished. No matter what you drop or spray onto it nothing currently known to mankind can stop it burning .

There are three main types of forest fire.
Floor fires. These burn up leaves grasses & fallen branches but do not extend into the understory and are the type the previous inhabitants used to mostly do. They are generally called "cold fires"
Then there are floor & understory fires, same as the above but you allow the shrubbery to burn as well and these are "hot fires" which is what most hazard reductions are .
Finally there are canopy fires

Remember that the people who burned the country were bare footed so creating a stinking hot fire where you could not walk on the burned ground directly next to & behind the fire was a no no .

So you need either regular burns to burn off the regrowth or clearing to chop them down or a mixture of both appropriate to the forest type being burned.
Typically what happens is the authorities do mass burns then no follow up burn or clearing so a region burned 2 years ago burns worse this year.
The anti burn groups use this as their "proof" that hazard reductions are not effective and make the fire potential worse.
They also muddy the waters by perpetually stating the "hazard reduction does not prevent a forest burning " which puts the incorrect idea that they are supposed to be a fire prevention method into the heads of the city dwellers.
If you are following the current disasters you will also hear all of the fire chiefs talking about "hazard reduction targets " and these targets are nothing more than the numbers of acres burned and do not take into account the actual place that was burned.
It is just about a number on a page with a tick next to it. Quantity over quality .
In NSW most "hazard reductions" are between 5,000 hectares & 20,000 hectares and like the 737 spewing red goo is more about creating a show for the ignorant public than actually doing a useful job.
What you will not hear is "mosaic" burning which is what the previous inhabitants used to do and in most cases provides the best protection and aids the health of a forest.
It also takes the most manpower per acre to do, so the authorities will not do this regardless of the fact that most of the boots on the ground are filled with volunteers so are effectively free.

When I lived in the Blue Mountains it was prior to the formation of th RFS and the local volunteers did all of the burning autonomously , most of the burns were the mosaic style and were very efficient.
And because they were small the worst that would happen is you might smell "smoke in the distance " for an hour or so but no worse than the smoke from all of the wood heaters on a winter morning.
They were also done all year round except on total fire ban days & days with very heavy rains and on these days the crews did manual clearing on some previously burned patches.
When you are burning 10,000 hectares or more, that burn is very weather dpendent so there is a very limited window of opportunity to do them.
So when you hear a fire chief saying the "window of opportunity is reducing" what they are really saying is the days available when they can do very large scale & oft innappropriate or useless burning are becoming fewer so I can not reach my KPI ( and bonus probably ) target .
And it is these massive burns that cuses a lot of smoke & road closures which creates animosity towards them from city dwellers.
They were interviewig one of the underling managers from the RFS quite a while ago when the Gospers Mountain Fire blew up so the big boss was not available . He not only spilled the beans on this policy but literally toosed them all in the air so funny enough he has not been heard from since.
His statement went along the lines of " we might have to resort to the much more costlier mosaic burning in future seasons & this will be constrained by both bugets & manpower "
What most are not aware of is the actual numbers of participating volunteers is not over 70,000 as the RFS web site boasts.
According the the articles in the volunteers newsletters the actual number is closer to 18,000 which explains the reluctance of HQ to authorise small labour intensive hazard reductions .
You also have to understand that part of the Commissioners remit is to "increase the public persecption of fire safety" which you can not do by saying we have neither the money nor manpower to do our job properly.
However capturing the imagination of the totally illinformed with a rally really really big plane pouring goo into the forests which will make next years fires substantially worse amuses the masses and makes it look like he is doing his job.
it is amazing how deeply the super hero mythology is embedded ito our brains ie Elvis is here we will all be safe , we got a big jet we will all be saved etc etc etc.

Last edited by BSA_WM20; 01/08/20 10:52 pm.

Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795220 01/09/20 5:50 am
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 52
V
Villiers Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
V
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 52
Ahhh, low toxicity fire retardant. Here in Victoria we are now getting public warnings about the hazards of "low toxicity" fire retardant. Those of us on tank water are advised to disconnect down pipes from roofs feeding the tanks so as to avoid getting fire retardant in them and not to cook with water containing fire retardant. Farmers are also advised against letting stock drink water containing it. Strangely there seems to be no concern over human beings drinking water containg retardant, only over eating food cooked in it..

Personally it's the term "low" toxicity that bothers me. Low is not a measurement it's a vague description. Just another weasel word used to blur reality.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795228 01/09/20 12:41 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
The RFS claim they are using a goo called nitro-phos because it has less phosphorous than Phos-Check™ and as most Aussies know phosphorous is toxic to native plants.
Phosphorous is also toxic to humans in high doses and the older we get the lower that toxicity level becomes.
Phos Check ™ is supposed to be a mix of various ammonium phosphates of differeing valencies plus ammonium sulphate .
So no it would not be a good idea to drink or eat it but it won't kill you right then & there.
When I searched a while back for the composition of nitro-phos I could not find one but I assume it is somewhat similar with some ammonium nitrate to reduce the phospherous content .
So basically it is vegetable garden fertiliser. And we all know what fertilizer run off dose to marine environments
I would guess that the biggest problem is with the unspecified dispersant & detergent .
Apparently there is a couple of local labs working on formulations that are less toxic to the native flora & fauna.
And of course being highly water soluiable there is a very good chance of it geting into your blood stream thus the warning to disconnect the water tanks & drain them
The problem for us is it was developed for use in the USA where the vegetation is nothing like the vegetation down here.


Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795246 01/09/20 6:55 pm
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 19
F
friday1 Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
F
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 19
did Red Adair have any techniques other than oil capping ?

he starved the flame of oxygen with explosions. maybe a similar tech could be applied to bush fire.
blowing the [***] outta the place may not sound great but killing the flame is, = minus projectiles ;0)

Hydrogen has the fastest detonation velocity and the oxidisation = water

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: Villiers] #795250 01/09/20 7:35 pm
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 931
R
rick e. Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
R
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 931
Originally Posted by Villiers
Ahhh, low toxicity fire retardant. Here in Victoria we are now getting public warnings about the hazards of "low toxicity" fire retardant. Those of us on tank water are advised to disconnect down pipes from roofs feeding the tanks so as to avoid getting fire retardant in them and not to cook with water containing fire retardant. Farmers are also advised against letting stock drink water containing it. Strangely there seems to be no concern over human beings drinking water containg retardant, only over eating food cooked in it..

Personally it's the term "low" toxicity that bothers me. Low is not a measurement it's a vague description. Just another weasel word used to blur reality.



Don't worry, take a look at the Ad above, "Monsanto" has it under control! They never steered us wrong in the USA.


"Back in the garage with my [***] detector
Carbon monoxide making sure it's effective...
----THE CLASH-----

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795261 01/09/20 9:07 pm
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
D
Dibnah Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
One really, really big aircraft isn't enough, ten should be sufficient. BBC UK News carried an item yesterday about three fires merging into one fire with a front 30 - 40km wide, described by the presenter as "enormous". A few hours work for 10 off 747 tankers.

Nothing is absolutely safe and no doubt there are several views re: toxicity of fire retardants; the data sheet for the concentrated form of Phos Chek doesn't indicate any major issues https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/fire/wfcs/products/msds/retard/phoschek/d75-f_r.pdf , the concentrated form is then mixed 1 part concentrate to approx 12 parts water.

Victoria state list several fire retardants in use https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/publ...the-community/fire-retardants-and-health , including various versions of Phos Chek.

My view is that fighting the fires on the ground is more dangerous and less effective than waging a tonnage war from the air using 747s, others may have an alternative view.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795265 01/09/20 10:04 pm
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,730
Tridentman Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,730
I don't know anything about fire fighting---unless it is in terms of industrial relations in a manufacturing environment.
However I do feel for you guys in Oz and the terrible time that you are going through.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: friday1] #795272 01/09/20 11:17 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
Originally Posted by friday1
did Red Adair have any techniques other than oil capping ?

he starved the flame of oxygen with explosions. maybe a similar tech could be applied to bush fire.
blowing the [***] outta the place may not sound great but killing the flame is, = minus projectiles ;0)

Hydrogen has the fastest detonation velocity and the oxidisation = water



Now stop and have a little think about the differences between the two types of fires
One has a fuel, oil which is fairly cold and is using the heat from the flame to evaporate the liquid oil into a gas so it can burn.
Once you remove the flame for a few seconds you take away what is creating the gasseous phase and the oil at the surface cools down, stops evaporating so the fire is effectively put out provided the remaining oil gas is not reignited & can dissipate to a non flammible air : fuel ratio
And in the case of most oil well fires there is a very small surface area that is burning and the fuel is coming out of a small hole and that fuel is cold so will not burn.
Remember you can put white hot steel into oil and the oil does not burst into flames, heat treater do it all the time.
If you can find some U tubes of heat treating ( oil quenching ) railway wheels you will see the oil smoke then some flame right against the wheel where the red hot wheel is igniting the oil vapour but it all stops once the wheel is fully under the surface.

With a bushfire you have thousands of kilometers of fire front and the fuel is pyrolising wood.
If you blow out the flame, the wood will continue to pyrolise for a very long time and the instant it gets an oxadizing agent it will burst back into flame again .

If you blast a pool of oil and splash oil everywhere , that oil flying through the air will cool down, stop evaporating so when it hits the ground it will not burn, unless the ground is hot enough to vapourise the oil again & there is an ignition point or the ambient temperature is hot enough to cause self ignition.

Do the same thing with a bushfire & you are going to blow burning logs & branches all over the place and everywhere that they land will burst into flame because the red hot wood will become an ignition point for the dry fuel it lands on.
Thus you will be spreading the fire .
Also the burning log flying through the air does not go out but burns stronger as it is getting exposed to more air.
The effect is basically the same as reigniting a fire by fanning the embers and blowing the ash off the surface which is preventing air entering.
Basically what happens is a man made ember attack .

Back last century there were proposals to put barrels of gunpowder in front of the fire front in order to blow the fire out.
A few years back the same proposal was done for the West Australian fires except they were going to use barels of ammonia / oil explosive.
Now in theory it would work provided that all of the explosive force was directed back into the fire front so all of the debris blew back over the ground that had already been burned and the debris field was fully burned out .

Neither of these two exist in a real fire unless it is about to burn onto a sheer cliff face.

people latch onto an idea without actually thinking it through and when people who know what they are proposing will not work they arch up and become more committted to the point that they can no longer see reason let alone evaluating it.
People see things like fire retardants as a mgic bullet, you drop a bucket of it on a fie and the fire magically goes out & stays out.
They see the advertizing bumph that uses words like "long lasting " or "persistent" so they jump to conclusions that the goos work forever.
What they can not undersand or refuse to acknowledge is the act of preventing fuel burning consumes the retardant and if there is a lot of fuel it consumes all of the retardant very quickly.
To cool a ton of wood down to a temperature that pyrolysis ceases requires something like 5 tons of water to carry the heat away or 2 tons if you can some how make the water sit on the wood while it removes all of the heat by boiling.
Remember that water works on 2 levels.
IT cools the fuel thus reducing the rate of pyrolsis so reducing the intensity of the fire
IT prevents oxygen getting to the flame front thus smothering the flames.

A retardant only works on one level.
It pinches the Oxygen thus starving the fire of air.
However what people fail to appreciate is once the molecules of retardant have become fully oxygenated they cease to do anything.
Retardant alone can not put a fire out unless you put enough of it on a fire to smother a fire and you need a massive amount of it to do that.
How it is generally used is you drop it in front of the fire fire front as the fire front approaches whatever you are trying to protect.
The retardant slows that section of the fire down so the fire front takes on a U or V shape and runs around what you are trying to protect.
The speed of travel and the heat in the sides of the U or V is lowered enough ( hopefully ) so ground crews can attack the fire and prevent it burnng whatever you are trying to protect or the water doused onto the house etc is sufficient to protect it from the radient heat and ember attack.
The fire front travels past whatever you are protecting then fairly quickly joins up over the break you made with the retardant.

Also what people do not understand is there is the fire & the fire front.
The fire front , the bit with the 200' tall flames & massive heats which you see on the TV. THis is mainly the "kindling" forest floor debris & canopy in a crowning fire.
The there is the rest of the fire behind it , That is a lot cooler and consists of burning logs, thick branches & tree trunks plus all of the fuel that the fire front failed to consume .
The body of the fire can be 20 m, 30 miles deep and the full width of the fire front.
A change of winds causes this section to burst back into flames and is the bit you attack with water.

The fire front you starver for fuel

There is no other way to put out a bush fire.

Shane went to the effort of showing some simplified maths that we could all follow to show just how much retardant you would need to drop on a fire front to put out a fire.
IT is an impossible to deliver amount .
If you used every fire bomber on the planet it would take months of flying 24 / 7.
Not a single fixed wing bomber is certified for night use anywhere on the planet, although this is coming, it is not here yet , so not available to fight this years fires.
The only airports that can accomodate the big jets are better than 1/2 hour flying time so that limits them to around 7 drops a day per plane and there are ony 5 very large tankers on the planet that are in flying condition.
We have one down here , California has one in the USA and one has just finished a tour of duty in Brazil and is out of service for scheduled servicng and repairs which will take several months and has to be done because they have a contracts in the USA that requires it to be flight ready at call from April 1.

Some one who is not thinking strait decided without doing the maths or understand the physics that we could put the fire out in a couple of weeks , based solely on the advertizing he sees on face book using aircraft that do ot exist .
This happens when peoples sole source of information is face book & u tube where you see the same aircraft a dozen times painted different colours and skim the headlines without reading the text underneath it to find out thay are all the same plane.
There is only 1 747 in operation & it was made up by pinching bits from the previous 3 which are all in a bone yard being stripped down for parts. The certified plane is out of service till April .
There are 2 737's and one is down here.
There is a big tanker in Russia & one in China both locally made and neither certified to fly in Australia.

Last edited by BSA_WM20; 01/09/20 11:26 pm.

Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: Tridentman] #795273 01/09/20 11:35 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
Originally Posted by Tridentman
I don't know anything about fire fighting---unless it is in terms of industrial relations in a manufacturing environment.
However I do feel for you guys in Oz and the terrible time that you are going through.


And I am no expert either.
from age 12 to 19 I did mopping up a the NSW Scout HQ at Heathcote.
I did learn how to put out industrial fires in particular dross fires in furnaces and in the yard and scrap fires in the metal yard.
When we moved to a bush fire prone area ( Springwood NSW ) both of us went to the effort to "know the enemy" as we were going to live there till we died, "were" being the effective word.
There were 3 bushfires while we lived there and another when she was there by herself tht potentially threatened the house.
Both neighbours were volunteer fire fighters so bushfires were a very common discussion topic.
Being on a flood plane I had not bothered to keep up to date but the current fires changed all that.
In particular all of the days where the smoke has made it impossible for me todo much in the way of work outside.


Bike Beesa
Trevor
Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795330 01/10/20 7:23 pm
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 19
F
friday1 Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
F
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 19
BSA , you left out 1 element , 'the Greens'. they were the ones against cutting any trees in prep for bush fires.

I saw a doco recently saying that a plane in the grave yard is worth more than when it was in the air. they recycle motors etc so it is unlikely there will be a rush to get 747 into service for fire fighting, theres money to be made

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795334 01/10/20 8:24 pm
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,296
Q
quinten Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
Q
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,296

Wildfires have seasons.
fire season is longer during periods of hot dry weather .
Current trends in New South Wales have been hotter and drier .
"the greens" didn't take away the rain .
.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: friday1] #795335 01/10/20 9:00 pm
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
S
Shane in Oz Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
S
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,227
Originally Posted by friday1
BSA , you left out 1 element , 'the Greens'. they were the ones against cutting any trees in prep for bush fires.

Not all greenies are Greens, and conversely not all Greens a re greenies. Make of that what you will.

The earlier thread which was pulled because it got a bit heated had quite a bit about the importance of hazard reduction, well maintained fire breaks and the need for access and rapid response.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: BSA_WM20] #795337 01/10/20 9:35 pm
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
D
Dibnah Offline
BritBike Forum member
Offline
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 790
Fire retardants work in several ways, including cooling, production of water vapour, generating a non-flammable coating on the fuel, reducing flammability and delaying combustion.

Even a basic risk assessment indicates that it's madness that men are expected to fight huge fires at close proximity with low volume water hoses and hand tools when technology can offer an alternative. There is indeed no fleet of 747 tankers currently available, primarily due to incompetent planning, although cost is probably a factor.

7 drops per day, 90,000 litres over 2 miles per 747 per drop (previously 3 miles), 10 off 747s, 1000 mile fire front, perhaps 10 days.

Can substantial tanker tonnage be provided for the current fires? Only the US military would have the capability, they have approx 200 Globemasters, but they might be busy.

Re: Bushfires , water bombing and fire management [Re: friday1] #795341 01/10/20 11:12 pm
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
B
BSA_WM20 Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
OP Offline
BritBike Forum member
B
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,250
Originally Posted by friday1
BSA , you left out 1 element , 'the Greens'. they were the ones against cutting any trees in prep for bush fires.

I saw a doco recently saying that a plane in the grave yard is worth more than when it was in the air. they recycle motors etc so it is unlikely there will be a rush to get 747 into service for fire fighting, theres money to be made


Well a plane in a grave yard does not accrue compulsory hourly services charges .
Remember that 747's are very old planes. So the time between major inspection & services is short & gets shorter the older they get and the services get more expensive.
This is originally the final nail in Evergreens coffin.
Just when the plane was needed it was grounded because these had not been done & were overdue and the other two were grounded by the FAA
None of the original 3 are flying.
The current one is a newer ( OK less old ) 747 gutted & fitted with the system that sent Evergreen Avaition bankrupt taken out of one of their old planes.
Global Super Tankers have not made it public if they intend to refit the tanks from the other two Evergreen 747's into newer airframes so on might expect it is not particularly economic.
Apparently the other 2 are still sitting in the desert and only fire fighters would want the tanks & associated gear out of them .
The fact that Coulsons decided to reinvent the wheel and spend a lot of time & money designing an equivalent system to fit into a 737 when they could have just pulled the tank & gear out of the existing 747's and fit it to a lower hour plane speaks volumes to the economy of flying super tankers . There are thousands of old 747's out there.
When a tool is basically a PR stunt like the super tankers are then you don't need many of them to provide exciting footagefor the news crews to amuse the ignorant masses.
Put too many into service then the public will finally realize what the fire chiefs have been saying for decades, they have a very limited role in fire fighting and are not the magic bullet that can put out every large fire.
To put out small fires they need to be there within a few minutes of the fire starting so are really effective right after multiple lightening strikes .
On current fire down here they would be needing to drop a full load at less than 5 minute intervals over the entire fire front which is currently over 1000 miles.
people who believe that you can just bomb a fire out as as illinformed & ignorant of the reality of the situation as the USA generals were whothought they could win Vietnam without casualty by carpet bombing the entire north of the country.
The same clowns wanted carpet bombing of various places in the Middle East .

Lots of politics around tree removal in a time when we need a lot more planted

Last edited by BSA_WM20; 01/11/20 2:49 am.

Bike Beesa
Trevor
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Alan_nc, Graham Ham 

Home | Sponsors | Newsletter | Regalia | Calendar | Bike Project | BritBike Museum | Spiders Cartoons | DVD- Manuals & Parts books
Upgrade to: Gold Membership | Premium Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3