Drones and Common Sense Rant

MikeD said:
Are they assigned to this fire? If not and they're on standby for other areas, then they'll appear to be sitting. And again, if it's a Forest Service fire, and those are State of California airplanes and aren't assigned to that fire, then they won't necessarily be participating.
Click to expand...
No they are not but they are 30 miles away just hangin out and the forest service could order them right up and haven't. They aren't on standby for anything. Just pisses me off that our national forests are burning and they talk about "its so much worse when we can't fly cause of drones" but don't use all available resources when they can fly. They easily can call 2-3 s-2s out and still have one sitting to cover the Hemet and Ramona bases and then divert them back to state fires if they start.
 
sweeps said:
No they are not but they are 30 miles away just hangin out and the forest service could order them right up and haven't. They aren't on standby for anything. Just pisses me off that our national forests are burning and they talk about "its so much worse when we can't fly cause of drones" but don't use all available resources when they can fly. They easily can call 2-3 s-2s out and still have one sitting to cover the Hemet and Ramona bases and then divert them back to state fires if they start.
Click to expand...

They could request them, and the state may or may not release them (assuming it's a federal lands fire). If they're otherwise standing by for other calls, then who knows.
 
I don't know or even understand (as Mike does) who is under what jurisdictions, contracts, entities, etc. that all the aircraft fly under because it's complicated. But, for this specific fire, there have been 16 to 18 helicopters, 4 lead planes and 2 to 4 tankers along with over 2,000 ground personnel and equipment being used to fight this fire.

I am also not an expert on how to fight such fires and I defer to Mike and others here who have done do and/or have that knowledge. So I cannot presume anything. Remember too that we have had several fires happening at once, not only here in So. Ca, but up North. Resources have been spread all over the place. The DC-7's for instance were used in the Calgrove fire. 2 DC-10's were also being used up at the Washington Fire near Markleeville in Ca.The Forestry Service just signed a new contract with several companies for new Air Tankers:
  • Neptune Aviation, 6 BAe-146s
  • Coulson Aviation, 1 Lockheed L-382G
  • Air Spray USA, 4 BAe-146s
  • 10 Tanker Air Carrier, 5 DC-10s
  • Aero Flite, 6 BAe Avro 146 RJ85s
But only half of these planes are ready to go because the rest of them have not been inspected, modified, tested, etc. I have no idea how long that process will take either.

Cal Fire for instance cannot/is not involved in the Lake Fire Nor in the Calgrove fire or the Sky Fire - they have been being used in the Loma, Tesla, Corrine, Park Hill fires though.

I do know that when it comes to the Forestry Service out here is a jumble of jurisdictions and contracts, so that may be the issue you are seeing. Then you can even have the Bureau of Land Management involved and things get even more complicated. There are always State and Federal entities at play and how that all works----I have no clue. So really, what I know and understand is limited in these situations.
 
A Life Aloft said:
Cal Fire for instance cannot/is not involved in the Lake Fire Nor in the Calgrove fire or the Sky Fire - they have been being used in the Loma, Tesla, Corrine, Park Hill fires though.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why they need to bring this kind of thing into private hands. Send the resources where they are needed, rather than keep them isolated for political reasons.
 
mshunter said:
This is exactly why they need to bring this kind of thing into private hands. Send the resources where they are needed, rather than keep them isolated for political reasons.
Click to expand...

It's kind of like having different fire departments. One department gets dispatched for a particular fire, and responds. The other department, its not their fire and they haven't been requested, so they're still in their quarters and available. Nothing surprising there.

The kicker comes if they are requested. Whether they agree to respond, are allowed to respond, want to respond, etc. That's where the murkiness comes in, and that murkiness is different in different geographic areas.
 
That is exactly why it is done by contractors. Cost is cheaper. The problem is that the USFS want's a the champagne of airplanes on a MadDog 20/20 budget, so that's what they get. They could have paid the $20 mil/aircraft to have the P-3's re-engined and rewinged but that was too pricey. They were shown a way to make it feasible for a private company to absorb the cost, only if they gave a longer contract to spread out the fixed costs and recover them. They said no thank you. Instead you have a mixture of older generation aircraft which in my humble opinion, aren't as good as a tanked P-3 or tanked C-130 (non-Maffs). Unless Tanker-10 has fixed their tanking system, from what I remember the platform left lots of gaps in coverage.

MJG
 
Hey buddy, the USFS is a National Agency, under USDA. Problem not solved. Unless you want to fight fires like the VA works or the Post Office :) Unless you are talking making another agency, that is strictly the Aerial Fire Fighting Undersecretary? :)
 
That argument always cracks me up. The Post Office works like a well oiled machine. The FBI, NSA, CIA, etc. all work fabulously. And while the wing nuts always like to make fun of government agencies, they absolutely glorify the military.....which is a government agency!

Government does things well when it has the money to do so.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
That argument always cracks me up. The Post Office works like a well oiled machine. The FBI, NSA, CIA, etc. all work fabulously. And while the wing nuts always like to make fun of government agencies, they absolutely glorify the military.....which is a government agency!

Government does things well when it has the money to do so.
Click to expand...

USPS lost $2b last year. They've lost $750m the first quarter of this year. Meanwhile UPS is making money, and expanding IIRC. All those other EIEIO's I can't speak for.

But still, it's been proven that they can do it better, cheaper and faster.
 
mshunter said:
USPS lost $2b last year. They've lost $750m the first quarter of this year. Meanwhile UPS is making money, and expanding IIRC. All those other EIEIO's I can't speak for. But still, it's been proven that they can do it better, cheaper and faster.
Click to expand...

The USPS is not a business in the traditional sense. This is as ridiculous as saying "the military doesn't turn a profit." Duh.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
The USPS is not a business in the traditional sense. This is as ridiculous as saying "the military doesn't turn a profit." Duh.
Click to expand...

Point being, if they are charging for a service, and losing money, they aren't so great whether they are government run out not. Why do you think there had been talks of sitting them down? Because they ain't week oiled. Why, also, are there so many contractors delivering mail?
 
MikeD said:
The military is exceptionally inefficient; the epitome of fraud, waste, and abuse. When the day comes when we actually have to fight a peer enemy, we may not be as successful as we think we may be.
Click to expand...

Large multinational corporations are also the epitome of fraud, waste, and abuse. It's not about government or private sector, it's about size. Once any entity reaches a certain size, those things are pretty much inevitable.

Nevertheless, our military is second to none and could destroy the planet several times over.

mshunter said:
Point being, if they are charging for a service, and losing money, they aren't so great whether they are government run out not. Why do you think there had been talks of sitting them down? Because they ain't week oiled. Why, also, are there so many contractors delivering mail?
Click to expand...

Because Republicans.
 
mshunter said:
Point being, if they are charging for a service, and losing money, they aren't so great whether they are government run out not. Why do you think there had been talks of sitting them down? Because they ain't week oiled. Why, also, are there so many contractors delivering mail?
Click to expand...
Do you actually know (or care) why the United States Postal Service loses money?
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Do you actually know (or care) why the United States Postal Service loses money?
Click to expand...

Because delivering mail is important to keep the country running smoothly and the economy churning. So quit charging for postage, only charge for shipping packages, raise taxes to cover the entire cost of the domestic mail services. Or, use a company that actually makes money and is privately held.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top