Widebody fire bombers

Why bother?

The Canadair CL-15-16 series can deliver more water "down & dirty" in
a given time than these beasts.. A Cl 16 (I think) currrently holds
the record, over two hours it averaged a pickup, cycle and drop every
50 seconds on a fire is Brazil.

I have had the opportunity to watch one of these aircraft up close,
what an AWSOME plane!

Have a pix here somewhere showing 4 of them in the same frame!

A fire threatened a town in Quebec this spring, and they had to hit it
VERY hard to stop it..They used 4 of them...

Dave



On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:42:41 GMT, (Alan Bloom)
wrote:


I attended a seminar/sales pitch for this beast at a Wildfire
Conference last year. The cargo area is actually divided into several
different water compartments so that you're not dropping the entire
load at one time. Rather, it is being done sequentially. I seem to
recall that it is also computer aided to compensate for the severe
weight change during a drop.

The cost of operation is extreme and these giant tankers have many
limits. They would be great for large, open wildfires on the prairie
but be almost useless in the mountains due to their lack of
manueverability over and through rough terrain.

Rumor has it that Air Tractor has a twin-engine air tanker in the
works to complement their fantastic SEATs. But, I haven't heard
anything definite on a release date or even if the rumor is true.

Alan Bloom
Dogs can fly.
http://www.flyingmutts.com




On 23 Jun 2005 08:13:04 -0700, wrote:

I read a while back about Evergreen's 747 fire bomber. Saw some
impressive pictures of a test drop too. Recently I saw another pic on
airliners.net of a converted DC-10 also performing a test drop.
Considering the massive weight of the water involved, (the 74 carried
24,000 gals. @ 192,000lb) how do they keep the CG from going out of
limits during a drop? I'm guessing the drop is controlled by computer?

Will