This video was shot on September 12 and is tagged Silverado Fire at LiveLeak. It may be the same drop made by Tanker 912, a DC-10, shown in the photo below which was taken on the fire the same day. We posted the photo and more information about the Silverado fire on Wildfire Today.
In relation to Aerial fire fighting Aircraft Efficiency Square concept…
To be efficient and safe… a fire fighting aircraft (fixed or rotor wing) is actually a combination of 4 elements with multi sub elements options
– Fire suppressant; type, chemical efficiency, pattern on ground, etc
– Tank system; bucket, tank, constant flow, doors, etc
– Aircraft: performances, maneuverability, single/multi engine, etc…
– Crew; flying experience, fire fighting experience, training, etc…
So… imagine all combinations possible.
Flying low level is probably not an issue but can a zero fire fighting hour pilot flying a SEAT be efficient right away?
Obviously the DC-10 crews have improved a lot since 2005 and a close call. More fires, more drops, debriefings, creating SOP’s etc… Well done.
I’m glad to see USFS changed their mind about Vlats 180 degrees… Now they need to work on Initial Attack Concept…
Yes, all fires start small…
Re read your post , Chris
It DOES require a certain amount of ability and skill to put a ’10 in non standard flight profile…….it is the increasing ability of both pilots and putting an aircraft into those profiles
Check with Mr Hatton about this……I know many pilots in the 121 world that say that there are training standards……just short of test pilot skills in testing or putting aircraft into evolving ” newer ” delivery methods not normally delivered by the DC 10 in the past…..or not.
No beef with you, Chris.
I just know there a re plenty of Gov contract folks, firefighters, managers, and others that “think ” they understand the aviation world and what would be unremarkable to you and others….who may or may have not flown any size aircraft…..I would venture to say those folks flying that have an equal or greater amount of working knowledge of heavy aircraft than the average Pulaski operator…..
I bet that crew of 2-3 on a ’10 is cross checking airspeed, EPR of engines, and flap settings that probably is just as important as knowing strokes with file across a Pulaski
Are we comparing the skill levels of flying of a transport-category aircraft with those of sharpening a handtool? Sorry, I’m baffled.
There you go, Bill!
Really Chris…
Think the crews aren’t getting better and only doing on the request of managers? How about the increasing trust in aircrews and their aircraft.
If the the LMA’s did not have these new ” Next Gen ” aircraft that only the LMA world dubbed it…….those ’10’s would be MAYBE relegated to flying rubber dog;$()@&7 to third world countries
I think Hatton puts a lot of trust in his aircrews and mechanics to do what the aircraft is and was not intended to. If the LMA’s had thought about the seriousness of former transport category aircraft and contracted with Boeing , Lockheed, and McDonnell Douglas BITD this and many other programs would have been sewed up
Nobody in my world did not say airliners could not fit the flight profile……we merely stated by FAA regs and manufacture design standards……that is what they were designed to do
Their primary purpose was Part 121 and freight operations later in the ’10’s life
Just like many of the non purpose built aircraft……..now in the tanking biz making life easier 11,600 gallons at a time for a lot of the ground folks
Whew! Those triple negatives are dangerous, Leo! LOL 😉
Douglas product..;-)
Leo, I think you’ve misinterpreted my post, but to be honest, I’m not sure what your argument is. Perhaps you can help me out?
I believe we’re debating the same side of the argument, but I confess I got a bit lost in your post.
Whooo hoooo!!!!!!!
Yep that pretty much covers it.
The DC 10’s remind me of two crop dusters. Low, slow, turn on a dime and give you nine cents change. Good comment Mr. Cantdawg. Lots of good work by all the private air tanker operator and helicopter folks.
Very nice drop, to say the least. The VLAT pilots and crews are certainly getting better and better with the more complex mountain terrain. It wasn’t too long ago some of us thought the VLATs should only be used on the flat open areas; that they weren’t manuverable enough for mountain work. Thanks for proving us wrong. Keep up the good work and STAY SAFE!
I’ll venture that the aircrews aren’t getting better with “complex mountain terrain”, it’s that they’re finally being asked to drop in it on a regular basis. That speaks to the increasing knowledge and the trust placed by fire managers, not to the increasing ability of the airplane and its pilots. They have always claimed they follow the same laws of aerodynamics as any airplane, and that aircraft size is not a variable in a successful mission. What we saw in the video was, if we’re honest, unremarkable. A DC-10 made a straight, downhill run and didn’t appear to ‘run away’ with its speed. I think the surprise is limited to those who believe that airline-type airplanes are able to fly only airline-type flight profiles.
Nice job 10 Tanker. I’m glad to see your message seems to be getting through.
What a sight to see these huge planes here in Silverado and to watch them fly in a very steep canyon. We are VERY grateful for the help, and so very, very thankful to the pilot and crews of these planes.
As you know, fires in this area are brutal; they move fast and are very unforgiving. We got really lucky this time… very little wind. It’s been suggested that this fire was an apology from the Fire God for the brutal 2007 fire. I hope the fall and winter Wind and Water Gods do likewise.
BTW, the young man that hiked up to get this video had a VERY tough climb. He’s quite a guy:)
Very impressive image!