Canadian Forces cast about for used Hercules airframes

"Ron" wrote in message
...
The C-130 fire bomber crash in California put many of the airframes on a
course for being beer cans.


Not entirely true. Forest Service will not accept them for any retardant
tanker work. I believe some of the C-130As were used this summer, but
outside
the country.

I know people who retrofit C-130s and they are saying many will soon be beer
cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

Not entirely true. Forest Service will not accept them for any retardant
tanker work. I believe some of the C-130As were used this summer, but
outside
the country.

I know people who retrofit C-130s and they are saying many will soon be beer
cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

And again, not entirely true

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

But in the western states, the scoopers would not be near as useful. Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

There will always be a need for the heavy tankers with retardant..Might be less
of them in the future, but there will always be some around.

The ones to benefit the most from the probably elimination of C-130A and
PB4Y-2, will be companys and make and or operate SEATs, Single Engine Air
Tankers, like Air Tractors, Thrushs, Dromadiers.

I dont even think the USFS/OAS is going to card any additional P-2s, SP-2Hs for
retardant tankers..


Ron
Tucson AZ
C-421 air ambulance

"Ron" wrote in message
...
Not entirely true. Forest Service will not accept them for any
retardant
tanker work. I believe some of the C-130As were used this summer, but
outside
the country.

I know people who retrofit C-130s and they are saying many will soon be
beer
cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

And again, not entirely true

No Rob, it is entirely true that what happened is good for Bombardier. If
you were to choose to acquire even the most basic understanding of the
opertion of these quasi-public aircraft you would know that the "oldest
airframe" is the first launched. Bombardier's fire bombers are new and
subject to waiting a long long time before they are used today. A chnge in
the law is likely, due to the fact that old aircraft are more prone to
falling out of the sky.

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of
southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

Poor Ron, makes a false premise and then expands into more ignorance.

But in the weste n states, the scoopers would not be near as useful.
Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

Get back with us afeter you purchase a vowel, Ron.

cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

And again, not entirely true

No Rob, it is entirely true that what happened is good for Bombardier. If
you were to choose to acquire even the most basic understanding of the
opertion of these quasi-public aircraft you would know that the "oldest
airframe" is the first launched. Bombardier's fire bombers are new and
subject to waiting a long long time before they are used today. A chnge in
the law is likely, due to the fact that old aircraft are more prone to
falling out of the sky.

I didnt say it was not true at all...I am sure they might get some additional
orders, but those new Bombardier CL-415s are really expensive. They are good
at what they do though, not denying that at all.

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of
southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

Poor Ron, makes a false premise and then expands into more ignorance.


mmmmm okay

But in the weste n states, the scoopers would not be near as useful.
Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

Get back with us afeter you purchase a vowel, Ron.


Now that wasnt really neccessary John. I have never said a bad or personal
thing about you on here, even if I disagreed with you.

My point was that the retardant tankers are not neccesarily just interchangable
with the scooper type tankers. I have fought fire, both on the ground as a
wildland firefighter, and also as an air attack/recon pilot, on fires that a
scooper type would be as worthless as tits on a frog.

But areas with a lot of accessable water, that is not highly mountainous, can
be an ideal place for a Bombardier Cl215 or 415 tanker. Brainerd Minnesota I
believe has on based there during the summer. In some areas, they get lots of
use, and are far better than a heavy type, like a C-130A...



Ron
Tucson AZ
C-421 air ambulance

"Ron" wrote in message
...
cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

And again, not entirely true

No Rob, it is entirely true that what happened is good for Bombardier.
If
you were to choose to acquire even the most basic understanding of the
opertion of these quasi-public aircraft you would know that the "oldest
airframe" is the first launched. Bombardier's fire bombers are new and
subject to waiting a long long time before they are used today. A chnge
in
the law is likely, due to the fact that old aircraft are more prone to
falling out of the sky.

I didnt say it was not true at all...

You wrote something silly, Ron.

I am sure they might get some additional
orders, but those new Bombardier CL-415s are really expensive. They are
good
at what they do though, not denying that at all.

It is operational rules that styfle Bombardier's sales, not cost. Do you
have any idea what it costs to launch those radial engine relics out of Fox
Field? The USAF is crying now at the cost of keeping 707s flying.

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of
southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

Poor Ron, makes a false premise and then expands into more ignorance.

mmmmm okay

There are plenty of man made lakes to scoop from in the Southwest.

But in the weste n states, the scoopers would not be near as useful.
Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very
good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

Get back with us afeter you purchase a vowel, Ron.

Now that wasnt really neccessary John. I have never said a bad or
personal
thing about you on here, even if I disagreed with you.

"And again, not entirely true "

I take that as a personal insult.

I have respect for you Ron, as most of your posts are well thought out, but
since Dudley has taken his insults into the real world people in the real
world have been harmed. Even some Canadians are finding themselves DK'd,
over the trolls tantrum.

My point was that the retardant tankers are not neccesarily just
interchangable
with the scooper type tankers. I have fought fire, both on the ground as
a
wildland firefighter, and also as an air attack/recon pilot, on fires that
a
scooper type would be as worthless as tits on a frog.

Age of airframe is the fire bomber issue, from an operational standpoint.

From the Canadian standpoint, interchangability of parts is the issue and
that is true through the H model. in fact, Oz may have some Hs they mioght
be ready to sell.

But areas with a lot of accessable water, that is not highly mountainous,
can
be an ideal place for a Bombardier Cl215 or 415 tanker. Brainerd
Minnesota I
believe has on based there during the summer. In some areas, they get
lots of
use, and are far better than a heavy type, like a C-130A...

That C-130 folding up on live video was not good for the immage of the type.

All aviation is politics.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
"Ron" wrote in message
...
Not entirely true. Forest Service will not accept them for any
retardant
tanker work. I believe some of the C-130As were used this summer, but
outside
the country.

I know people who retrofit C-130s and they are saying many will soon be
beer
cans. The water bomber crash was bad for the C-130, but good for
Bombardier.

And again, not entirely true

No Rob, it is entirely true that what happened is good for Bombardier. If
you were to choose to acquire even the most basic understanding of the
opertion of these quasi-public aircraft you would know that the "oldest
airframe" is the first launched. Bombardier's fire bombers are new and
subject to waiting a long long time before they are used today. A chnge in
the law is likely, due to the fact that old aircraft are more prone to
falling out of the sky.

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of
southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

Poor Ron, makes a false premise and then expands into more ignorance.

Well, he sounds a lot less ignorant than the Tarvernaut. How many
CL-415's have been sold in the western US?


But in the weste n states, the scoopers would not be near as useful.
Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

Get back with us afeter you purchase a vowel, Ron.

Guess the concept of a goodly chunk of the area in our western states
not being all that compatable with fixed wing scoop operations is
beyond the Tarvernaut as well; but then again, if he can invent a
"recoiless" M102 for the AC-130, I guess it is pretty easy for him to
declare that scoop operations in those mountain lakes is a piece of
cake...

Brooks

They are two different aircraft that would be best in two different
environments. In big wide open areas with lots of lakes, like much of
southern
Canada, and Minnesota, those scoopers are great.

Poor Ron, makes a false premise and then expands into more ignorance.

Well, he sounds a lot less ignorant than the Tarvernaut. How many
CL-415's have been sold in the western US?

I know of no US orders resulting from the grounding of those two large types of
tankers (C-130A, or PBY4-2). Hawkins and Powers lost both of those aircraft
last year, and I certainly have not heard of them preparing to order a CL-415,
nor have I heard about Neptune, Aero Union, ARDCO or International Air Response
preparing to order any. I am not sure they could even afford them to buy them
if they wanted to.

The excess need is being taken up with SEATS...not Bombardiers..

But in the weste n states, the scoopers would not be near as useful.
Alpine
lakes surrounded by mountain peaks at around 10,000 MSL are not very good
places to be trying to scoop water, especially during a summer day.

Get back with us afeter you purchase a vowel, Ron.

Guess the concept of a goodly chunk of the area in our western states
not being all that compatable with fixed wing scoop operations is
beyond the Tarvernaut as well; but then again, if he can invent a
"recoiless" M102 for the AC-130, I guess it is pretty easy for him to
declare that scoop operations in those mountain lakes is a piece of
cake...

Brooks

Sigh....well at least Brooks sees my point. There is an OCCASIONAL fire in the
southwest that might have a large enough body of water nearby for a CL-415, but
its certainly not enough to begin basing CL-415s in the desert, even if John
Tarver thinks it is a good idea. Dont expect to see new Bombardier scooper
tankers at Winslow, Sierra Vista, Prescott, Pueblo, Albuquerque, or Alamogordo
tanker bases any time soon.

The bodies of water in the SW that might be near a fire, are far better served
by Helos such as Sikorski/Erickson Skycranes and S-60 firehawks..than CL-415s.
I saw some of those S-60 Firehawks in Missoula last month, and they are quite
impressive in their capabilities. Erickson is building new Skycranes, since
they have all the type certificates from Sikorsky now too.

The fire the C-130A was lost on, was the Cannon Fire in California, which might
help those doing a websearch for the file. There are also photos of the PB4Y-2
that were taken at the moment it had structural failure also..It was shortly
afterwards in Colorado that it happened.
Apparently the USAF had some similar failures on their C-130As too




Ron
Tucson AZ
C-421 air ambulance

"Ron" wrote in message
...

Sigh....well at least Brooks sees my point.

No Ron, Brooks is a clueless idiot and you just look like a fool replying to
him.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Sigh....well at least Brooks sees my point.

No Ron, Brooks is a clueless idiot and you just look like a fool replying to
him.

Does anyone really value the Tarvernaut's opinion when it comes to
clues, idiocy, or foolery? Or for that matter the subjects of aircraft
systems or Civil War history (the only man known who preaches that the
Confederacy was blockading the North, and not the other way
around...)? I thought not...

Brooks