Martin Mars Water Bomber

Fire-related topics

Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby noremac » Aug 28th, 2015, 11:19 pm

Can anyone explain why the Martin Mars is not here helping with the fires? Anyone who saw it working in 2003 knows how much knock down power that plane has with every drop it makes. If I were living in Oliver or Rock Creek, I'd be asking some questions.
noremac
 
Posts: 31
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 15 posts
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2005, 9:59 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby Always Sunny » Aug 28th, 2015, 11:41 pm

noremac wrote:Can anyone explain why the Martin Mars is not here helping with the fires? Anyone who saw it working in 2003 knows how much knock down power that plane has with every drop it makes. If I were living in Oliver or Rock Creek, I'd be asking some questions.


http://www.avtimes.net/news/322760841.html
http://www.news1130.com/2015/08/15/new- ... rs-bomber/

And a whole bunch more articles if you use the old Google machine.
User avatar
Always Sunny
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2368
Likes: 1147 posts
Liked in: 1248 posts
Joined: Oct 24th, 2009, 7:00 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby madadam » Aug 29th, 2015, 1:52 am

This ones short and simple - http://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-s-contract-wit ... -1.2534589



The B.C. Wildfire Service contract for the huge Martin Mars water bomber has ended.

Owner Wayne Coulson says the plane was used five times over four fires and dumped one million litres of water.

According to B.C. wildfire officials, the total cost for the big plane was $736,000.

Coulson says he's now speaking to officials in Washington state, to determine if the Martin Mars could be useful over the huge forest fires blazing there.
madadam
Board Meister
 
Posts: 674
Likes: 82 posts
Liked in: 161 posts
Joined: Nov 28th, 2004, 8:03 pm
Location: Okanagan Center

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby skydawg » Aug 29th, 2015, 8:12 am

I think its better off in a museum.

canuck500 likes this post.
skydawg
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3272
Likes: 67 posts
Liked in: 473 posts
Joined: Feb 6th, 2005, 4:05 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby Woodenhead » Aug 29th, 2015, 9:34 am

Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
 
Posts: 5184
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 964 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby sassybee » Aug 29th, 2015, 11:12 am

From the Martin Mars website:
The Province has stated that the Mars we can only work from 113 bodies of water vs the SEATS at 1,700.
We produced a map for the BC Wildfire Service of the water sources the Mars can work from, with production circles to help identify the highest production water sources.
The outside of the circle represents 1 Mars load per hour (or 9 SEAT loads) and inside the circle, depending on the fire location, means the aircraft can get there quicker and do more drops.
Based on this map you can see the Mars can drop in the majority of urban interface BC communities with at least one drop per hour. Each drop covers 4 acres and based on water availability being so vast the Mars, is closer to 2 drops (or 18 SEAT loads) per hour.
sassybee
Board Meister
 
Posts: 356
Likes: 22 posts
Liked in: 34 posts
Joined: Jul 12th, 2005, 9:16 am

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby trapp » Aug 29th, 2015, 5:01 pm

And where would you suggest the Mars pull water from for the Rock Creek fire that would be anywhere near cost efficient???? Look at a map and make a suggestion. On the Okanagan Mountain fire it was inefficient compared to the "ducks" and Okanagan Lake was right there.

No big fire forum is complete without an armchair wildfire expert wanting the obsolete Marten Mars be deployed on a fire.

Yes the sooner the last one is in a air museum somewhere the better.
"It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts."

canuck500 likes this post.
User avatar
trapp
Übergod
 
Posts: 1001
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 409 posts
Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:16 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby JBX » Aug 29th, 2015, 6:42 pm

It's that silly way people get when their entire lives are burning down, they prefer perhaps to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem rather then fret about money while they lose everything.

Fools eh?
"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." -George Orwell
JBX
Fledgling
 
Posts: 331
Likes: 306 posts
Liked in: 234 posts
Joined: Jul 8th, 2014, 11:06 am
Location: Kaleden

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby MAPearce » Aug 30th, 2015, 8:26 am

trapp wrote:And where would you suggest the Mars pull water from for the Rock Creek fire that would be anywhere near cost efficient???? Look at a map and make a suggestion. On the Okanagan Mountain fire it was inefficient compared to the "ducks" and Okanagan Lake was right there.

No big fire forum is complete without an armchair wildfire expert wanting the obsolete Marten Mars be deployed on a fire.

Yes the sooner the last one is in a air museum somewhere the better.


In this age of advanced technology I just can't see why that plane can't be made more efficient.. OK , it's to big for most lakes and I get that but for all the fires around big lakes that it can scoop from ,it would makes sense to have a few of those beasts to knock a fire out with a drop or two and then other resources could focus on fires where the Mars can't

If the powers that be deployed it when it would be most effective , ie; when a fire has just started , it would be a "no brainer" to have a craft that could drop 27,000 litres in a single hit ..

That's where the problem lies, in resource management IMO. Too many "generals" counting money while a fire grows out of control.
I payed attention in High school....But not to what they were trying to teach me..
User avatar
MAPearce
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 11739
Likes: 1989 posts
Liked in: 4755 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2009, 6:15 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby Woodenhead » Aug 30th, 2015, 1:04 pm

Nostalgia trumps facts.
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
 
Posts: 5184
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 964 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby MAPearce » Aug 30th, 2015, 4:41 pm

Woodenhead wrote:Nostalgia trumps facts.


Sure ... Think of it this way Woody.

There are 117 lakes in this province that the Mars can work from.. Meaning that there are 117 lakes that smaller aircraft DON"T HAVE TO. They can be deployed anywhere else BUT those 117 lakes.

Of the fires around those 117 lakes that the Mars can deliver its MASSIVE payload of water and gel , manpower on the ground could , most likely , be reduced because of said MASSIVE payload being spread over a larger area.

And before you hid behind the "nostalgia" bit , notice this ?

In this age of advanced technology I just can't see why that plane can't be made more efficient..


If you are going to suggest that the technology doesn't exist to do just that today , I'd suggest that you have no faith in the technology of tomorrow never mind that the warming trends of the planet serve as a harbinger of the future. Meaning that clearly there is a foreseeable NEED for such large capacity water bombers in the future.

So the Hawaii Mars is aged and requires a lot of attention to keep it air worthy. Big deal, it's worth it when this joint is burning down and resources are at a premium and if the forest industry and our gov't had an ounce of brains between the two of them , they'd recognize that fact , put there heads together and bust out the plans for that old bird to make newer ,faster and more efficient craft that can do as close to the same job as the Mars does this very day.

Coulson has all the plans for the Mars in his desk . I see NO reason why it can't happen aside from gov't indifference and favoritism and that Coulson's bank account just isn't big enough.
I payed attention in High school....But not to what they were trying to teach me..
User avatar
MAPearce
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 11739
Likes: 1989 posts
Liked in: 4755 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2009, 6:15 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby Woodenhead » Aug 30th, 2015, 6:42 pm

All this has been gone over before in another thread already. I linked to it earlier. Believe whatever you want, I'm not going to bother rehashing the same crud all over again. (my actual opinion is in that thread, BTW, I'm not reposting it here)
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
 
Posts: 5184
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 964 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby trapp » Aug 30th, 2015, 9:25 pm

MAPearce wrote:
Of the fires around those 117 lakes that the Mars can deliver its MASSIVE payload of water and gel , manpower on the ground could , most likely , be reduced because of said MASSIVE payload being spread over a larger area.


This statement is typical of arm chair wildfire control experts. Tanker drops do not extinguish fires. Every drop needs follow up by ground or machine crews or it is just money wasted. This is particularly true with the shortest lasting of fire retardants, and water is the shortest. So a larger drop area means more manpower on the ground.
"It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts."

2 people like this post.
User avatar
trapp
Übergod
 
Posts: 1001
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 409 posts
Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:16 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby canuck500 » Aug 31st, 2015, 11:09 am

Not to mention the havoc that much water coming down causes with slippery ground and dangerous trees. Using the Mars is like unleashing a nuclear bomb when what you really need is small smart bomb.

2 people like this post.
canuck500
Fledgling
 
Posts: 246
Likes: 381 posts
Liked in: 37 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2011, 5:28 pm

Re: Martin Mars Water Bomber

Postby MAPearce » Aug 31st, 2015, 3:42 pm

So , what you guys are saying is that the Mars shouldn't have been fighting fires for as long as it has then ? That it has always been a waste of time and energy ??

WOW ! I'm sure the forest company's , who primary interest in the Mars in the first place was to save them MILLIONS of dollars of timber due to fire , would laugh at you as they light their big fat cigars and count their money.. It's why THEY bought and converted them to water bombers in the first place..

Seems that you all forgot that , essentially , they were the product of greed.
I payed attention in High school....But not to what they were trying to teach me..
User avatar
MAPearce
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 11739
Likes: 1989 posts
Liked in: 4755 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2009, 6:15 pm

Next

Return to Fire Watch 2015

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests