MIL-8 MTV helicopter filmed in Australia

MIL-8 helicopter
The MIL-8 helicopter operated by Hevilift. Screenshot from the video.

The video below published January 10, 2020 features a  helicopter operated by Hevilift that was becoming available to help firefighters in Australia.

The on scene reporter said the helicopter can carry 5,000 liters (1,300 gallons), which is half of the capacity of an Air-Crane helicopter. Large and very large air tankers can carry 3,000 to 19,000 gallons.

The MIL-8 MTV did not extract the UH-1H helicopter that earlier ditched into a lake, as stated in the video. The Royal Australian Navy and Royal Australian Army pulled it out of the water.

Typos, let us know HERE. And, please keep in mind our commenting ground rules before you post a comment.

6 thoughts on “MIL-8 MTV helicopter filmed in Australia”

  1. I’m still looking for some footage of an aerial firefighting appliance putting out flames. Until I see such footage, I will hold the view that they’re useful at putting out small spot fires on or near buildings started by flying embers but pretty much useless at helping to manage or control bushfires.

    1. Bernie, there is an immense amount of footage available online showing compelling results from aerial suppression work. If you are specifically referencing rotary outcomes, targeted asset protection by the new NRMA Insurance owned Bell 205 down near Moruya NSW saved multiple homes & comms assets – that is a good place for you to consider the results.

      I don’t think anybody is saying a helicopter with limited tank scale is going to suppress a major crowning fire, but used strategically, they are an exceptional asset on the fireground.

      1. While I appreciate your comments and links, Col, and I accept that aerial firefighting appliances have some value in protecting/saving infrastructure, I am quite amazed that I still cannot find online any footage actually showing the aerial application of water or retardant putting out a grass or bush fire. I’m aware that crown fires are almost impossible to fight using any method other than reduction of fuel on the ground (and that’s another story) so my issues are:
        1. aerial firefighting appliances are extremely expensive to buy/lease and operate
        2. the large planes have a very long turn around time so I question their cost effectiveness
        3. the public sees these planes and helicopters in the news and assume their houses will be saved by them when bushfire threatens, so at-risk home owners take far fewer precautions than they should to protect their assets, and
        4. the cost of one aerial appliance for one season could otherwise fund several ground crews and their equipment, which are then available over the cooler months to conduct fuel reduction burns.

        By the way, the video link you provided shows a helicopter applying retardant around a dwelling but there’s no evidence of a fire in the video and, while I may be nit-picking, it’s not evidence of a home being saved, only being painted red. So I really would like to see some footage of aerial firefighting appliances putting out fires.

  2. Bernie, the product applied using large air tankers is a “Fire Retardant”, it was not designed to extinguish a fire, just retard the advance of the fire until ground personnel can do their job. In some cases it has been used in direct attack on a fire, but these are rare instances. Helicopters have been used to apply retardant, but generally they apply water only.

    1. Understood. The problem in my mind is that politicians and governments are being hounded into buying or leasing more aerial firefighting appliances to help put fires out (which is what the public believes they do), yet I have seen no videos or reports or any other evidence that they make much of a difference in putting out fires, although it’s clear they are useful at saving infrastructure, either by using water to put out burning embers that land on or around buildings or through the application of retardant.

  3. This site posted infra red video on October 20,2019 of a helo drop on a fire.
    The amount of heat removed from the fire is pretty obvious and the fact that a building is not in the frame is immaterial, the result would be the same. It’s all about tools in the toolbox. It would be a pretty poor mechanic that only had a screwdriver in his toolbox. The same logic applies to fighting fire.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *