First Global SuperTanker nears completion

The first 747-400 Global SuperTanker is nearing completion on Sacramento. The aircraft underwent a heavy maintenance check, along with being brought into compliance with 28 ADs, and now is having the water tanks and dump system installed.

Alterna Capitol Group owns the aircraft and plans to use it worldwide to assist firefighters, or oil cleanup crews. They've been to Australia, Germany, Croatia, France and the European Union in Brussels to discuss operations. The previous 747 tanker was owned and operated by Evergreen before they shut down.

The new aircraft will be able to carry over 19,000 gallons of water, fire retardant, or oil dispersant over 4,000 nm. They also see a potential fleet of up to 4 aircraft.

www.flightglobal.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Sounds AWESOME!!!

Found this article which has some great photos fireaviation.com...











Just look at the landing gear, jeeeze

a reply to: FamCore

What makes me mad is I just left Sacramento.

a reply to: Zaphod58

marvelous machine.. thanks for sharing Zaphod

That is a very large capacity .I wonder what the turn around is . This Martin Mars does a good job if you have a lake around to refill . But its just 8000 gallons

a reply to: the2ofusr1

About 30 minutes to refill the tanks for the Evergreen 747 and the DC-10 that is also used.

Awesome!! Now if someone put a pair of skids,,,

Good Lord!! that's a fine looking aircraft.


I can imagine the Hotshots are going to love it!

Wow Just imagine the chemtrails they can lay down with that big boy.

a reply to: Caver78

It's actually safer for them in addition to carrying more than the usual tankers. It drops over such a wide area that it doesn't impact with as much force.

a reply to: Nickn3

Oh please don't get them started.

lol!

Okay when I first read the title of the thread I thought this was an air-to-air refueling tanker. Then I read this in the OP:

and now is having the water tanks and dump system installed.

So, I thought "that thing must have one big ass bathroom!"


Then I read the next paragraph and realized this was a firefighting tanker aircraft.

-dex

a reply to: Zaphod58

Do you think this type of application (water bomber) is particularly hard on an airframe. I only say that because of a recent video that I watched...it showed a C130 dropping water and then the wings broke off....it was sad to watch.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Oh yes. It's brutal on an airframe. These will stay somewhat higher than the usual tankers do, to reduce the stress, but it's still going to require a lot more proactive maintenance than normal.

They lost a PBY that year too. That's what led to Evergreen converting the first 747.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Yes it is. Having to fly in the dense turbulent air near the ground and around fires is rough enough on an airframe. Then you add in the weight of the water or retardant onboard and then releasing it in a short amount of time. That's a lot of stress on wing spars.

I never have understood why there's not a fleet of 50 of these. Wouldn't that be cheaper than the millions spent fighting fires that get out of control? You would think there would be a bazzillion tankers in California alone. Just my 2 cents.

Thank you guys for answering that.....I assumed it was...and yet it seemed a little odd that the wings on the 130 came off "after" the load was dropped. But Im sure there was more happening in those few seconds then meets the eye. Positive G's then negative G's then positive in quick succession ...I imagine.

a reply to: HarryJoy

They start out with negative Gs as they push over down the hill, then positive as they level out and start to pull out. After they release, the aircraft flexes for lack of a better description, as the weight is released, which puts strain on the spars as the fuselage lifts.

a reply to: SonofaSkunk

They spent something like $40M on this one alone.

a reply to: SonofaSkunk

Apparently there are a lot of factors that come into play regarding the effectiveness of aerial firefighting.
- It's expensive relative to ground forces.
- Environmental conditions like temperature and humidity have different impacts.
- They are more effective when deployed early, becoming less effective as the fire continues to burn.
- It's inherently dangerous. One study found that half of wildfire firefighting fatalities were aerially related.
- Aerial firefighting is not particularly effective on really hot fires because the water or retardant never reaches the ground.

KCRA Investigative Report
Australian study

-dex