Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Avenger's back, again (with awesome pics)
12
Avenger's back, again (with awesome pics)
2007-08-26, 4:44 PM #41
Originally posted by Avenger:
The DC-10 drop a 100 foot wide, 3/4 mile long line.


The "mile long" was a conservative estimate...

Quote:
You have to think about what a wildfire is like. Flames reach 60, 80, 100 ft in the air, temperatures quite high, and not to mention the hurricane-like wind gusts that a wildfire can generate. You drop a chute-bomb and it drifts away because of a gust, well now you've wasted a bomb, $$$, and time. Also, you would need A LOT. You fail to realize the size of wildfires. These burn hundreds of acres. You're thinking of using bombs to suck the oxygen out so the fire can't burn. Like how they would put out an oil rig fire. It doesn't work on a large scale such as a wildfire.


For one, I was talking about some form of retardant bomb, second if I were talking about HE, you greatly miscalculate the abilities of a dedicated carpet bomber such as the B52. At the minimum we'd be talking about 250 or 500lb in a line that could stretch well over a mile.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2007-08-26, 4:57 PM #42
No one is underestimating the capabilities of the B-52. You're far over estimating the budget agencies have to spend when it comes to fighting these fires. The money is not available to use that kind of technology to put a fire out. Why do you think that US Forest Service bombers are Korean War vintage? The money is not there to spend. You can dream all you want about these new military technologies being engineered to put out a wildfire, but until the funding is available, you're just blowing smoke. Besides, a bomb, or even a series of bombs, would not create a solid retardant line on a consistent enough basis to be effective. If there are any gaps in the retardant line, it's next to useless.
Pissed Off?
2007-08-27, 12:14 AM #43
Originally posted by Commander 598:
...you greatly miscalculate the abilities of a dedicated carpet bomber such as the B52. At the minimum we'd be talking about 250 or 500lb in a line that could stretch well over a mile.

No, you're over estimating the capabilities of the BUFF. As I already stated, the B-1B would be a much more logical platform for the "fire retardant bombing platform." It lifts more lbs., it isn't affected by crosswinds at low altitudes as much as the 52, and it is in fact designed for low altitude flying and maneuvering. However, the price of keeping a bomber like the Bone or the BUFF in the air is extremely high compared to keeping a Herc in the air. Bombers are expensive. Lifters...not so much.
omnia mea mecum porto
2007-08-27, 12:20 AM #44
Originally posted by Commander 598:



105s aren't big enough nor does the Spectre carry enough of them. Though having bombs set on a very low altitude air burst might work...


Don't underestimate 105's.
If you use them right, especially on a FFE mission, they will **** some **** up.

Plus you can accurately aim them as opposed to dropping flame retardant filled bombs from a B-52.
If my smoking bothers you, don't breathe.
12

↑ Up to the top!