Why isn't Colorado's big 747 SuperTanker helping fight the Australian fires?

a reply to: Zaphod58

The article says that the Supertanker uses a combination of water with a retardant. I'm not sure at what stage they have to be mixed together, but isn't there a way to transport the retardant on the plane until they can get to or mix it with water?

a reply to: Deetermined

They can carry the mix with them, but it's mixed on the ground before being loaded onto the aircraft.

a reply to: Waterglass

March 2019 was what: last winter, and only a little later than right now this year in 2020? SO … I think it is most likely yearly maintenance. Further, must they wait the entire 365 days for 'yearly maintenance', or can they go for maintenance a little early because the Western United States was 'hot' this year with some fires too?

Maybe also they didn't expect blazes to erupt like they have done in Australia this year?

There have been bad surprises for all involved during the prior year of 2019, and into the start of 2020, for all involved fighting wild fires recently. Truly.

It is witin the tankers reach to deploy down there. It has gone to both Chile and Israel in the past. Its a question of paying them to deploy. Also given the scope of the fires perhaps it did not provide enough benefit vs cost?

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
a reply to: Waterglass

Could be time for an annual, or it hit the hour mark for complete tear down and inspection.

Most Part 25 aircraft (air transport types) don't really undergo a Part 43 "annual" They operate under what is called a progressive maintenance program, which is a system where at various time, hour or cycle benchmarks they undergo different inspections called checks. Those happen at different times for different types. An "A check" is the lightest and on the aircraft I currently fly (the 747-400) it will go in for a A Check every 10 weeks or so. It takes about a day to do unless they find something seriously wrong. There isn't a B Check any more. A C Check is more intensive and happens, with our 747s, about every 18 months or so. Depending on what is found, it takes about 3 weeks. The heaviest check is the D Check. The aircraft is basically taken apart and every piece inspected. The landing gear comes off. Every system is dismantled. It happens every 6 years and takes usually 2 months or so. In addition to these progressive checks, there is other maintenance to replace expendables. Stopping a 700,000 pound airplane going 160 mph is hard on brake pads and tires. So the tanker could have been in for a C check last year and in again now for a demate this year.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes pretty much how they treat the water scoopers i.e. Firebosss, Air Attack will give them an assigned area especially on a large fire and let them go to work, only redirecting them when Tankers come in. Very efficient. Lots of small fires are extinguished by these aircraft fires that could potentially have been huge. Those don’t make the news often, maybe the local paper, maybe. Great tool in the NW USA where scoopable water sources are plenty full.

Also used as Initial Attack, a lot of the times they will beat the Air Attack and helicopter To the reported incident. My buddy was amused when he told me they launched two Firebosses, had the fire out before the IC on the ground could get a size up. That’s awesome.

a reply to: Waterglass

Maybe resources are better used on other measures than moving one 747, even if its the biggest fire fighting jet in the world, to Australia. Could there maybe be two lesser jets more readily available?

Its also not just a button press to have such a specialized craft put into action on the other side of the world. Surely there's a lot of logistics and people involved. Does the benefit outwiegh the cost, not just in money but in the opportunity to place something more accessible into service? Or the cost of reduced readiness in the US / elsewhere in the Americas?

Would that one jet have a major enough impact on the situation in Australia to justify the other side of the equation?

We can never throw all of everything at every situation. Taking it to a silly extreme to illustrate the point, if every fire fighter, hose, pump, tanker plane, helicopter, ship, etc., was sent to fight the fires in Australia, the rest of the world would burn.

Its likely as simple as that.

Two 40 foot tank containers were moved to Canberra to support the additional DC-10s that are scheduled in.

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: Bluntone22

So why would someone make a video and post it on Youtube with that title. Just asking?

Click bait. Not a new concept.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
You:

Why isn't Colorado's big 747 SuperTanker helping fight the Australian fires?

Also you:

The video say its undergoing maintenance in California.

I'm going to go with 'What is undergoing maintenance in California for $1,000, Alex'.

Its being fit with a Jack Parsons Occult clutch! With an HP Lovecraft gyrator ! Secret Secret H=3

a reply to: SulfurMercurySalt

I say bring on a referendum down here to get SA's submarine building base refurbed & knock out a couple of these big boys. Why the Fark we even build frickin subs is beyond me.