Martin Mars Petition

[my5cents]

Yes, and one they take seriously and have successfully addressed the Smith Creek fire as a result.

The goofs I saw on the news whining are exactly that, goofs who haven't a clue, and simply figure that bigger is better, regardless of whether it's true or not. If they're that worried, they shouldn't have placed themselves in the woods, with only one way in and out in the first place.

It depends on the fire, it depends on the location. I agree that the odds are for the Fire Boss, but there are many fires where the MM would be head and shoulders ahead of several Fire Boss.

Basically the MM can dump just short of 10 times the water.

Consider putting out a raging camp fire. Throw one cup of water every 5 minutes for 50 minutes or dump half a gallon at one time ?

I lived in Carrs Landing at the time of several fires adjacent to Okanagan lake. The MM just circled around scoop, dump scoop dump. In that case it was the tool for the job.

I do agree that for several reasons, financial being low on the list, the Fire Boss is the plane of choice.

I don't think calling those in favor of the MM a "goof" is appropriate.

[graceland87]

Wow this was a shocker, I remember seeing news articles claiming the public was screaming for this old flying rust bucket to return. How about the bill for that bird be sent to those 18000 people that signed it. Why does the general public think this is the end all aircraft for wild land fire suppression. In truth this 4 engine world war 2 brick isn't very effective in most fire situations. Mostly due to its high maintenance and operational crew requirements. It also needs a lot of space to move around, it would be like trying to maneuver a 30 ton rock truck in the tim hortins drive thru at spall. Granted it does carry a large amount of water, however once the water is on the ground it begins to evaporate eventually its like it wasn't even there in the first place. By now the mars has had to abort two landings on a very large lake because every yahoo with a outboard motor boat and canoe are out "looking at the fire" . If it was effective at supressing fire they would still be in use/production today. Smaller, agile and faster planes with retardant are more beneficial for the guys and gals on the ground. This is what puts fires out people, boots on the ground! Not aircraft, retardant from aircraft help slow the fire and give the firefighter a chance to do their job. Instead of signing a needless petition for the return of the mars how about one for more forestry crews to be stationed around the province or improvements to your local paid-on-call/volunteer/ career fire depts. even better a petition for the mars to stay where it belongs...on the ground.

[LoneWolf_53]

I don't think calling those in favor of the MM a "goof" is appropriate.

You might if you'd observed them on the news as I did.

[rookie314]

The US forest service didn't have a problem using old aircraft, PB4 bombers from WWII and A model C130 Hercules until they started shredding wings on them.

http://youtu.be/-A4QZAxrb28

[Steve-O]

every good mechanic has a complete tool box. Why not keep it in the box? Well besides the old and expensive arguments. I have an old 3/4 inch wrench with rust on it, kind of a weird wrench, open wrench on one end and a pivoting socket at the other, its come in handy once or twice.

That being said, those 4 little bombers were turning laps very quick, maneuverable as all git out and I'm told, dead accurate. Maybe they are the future of firefighting.

[JLives]

I feel we have a good balance of fire fighting services currently. They get most of the fires under control quite quickly unless something out of the ordinary happens. I was scared of the potential of the Mt. Boucherie one in particular. It's so dry there. I trust they made the right decisions on efficiency of aircraft and we really don't need the Martin Mars'.

[Rwede]

You might if you'd observed them on the news as I did.

Agreed. When asked about the statistical analysis that proves the Air Tractors better fighters, the old lady being interviewed could only come back with "I don't believe it because it could be a government lie." That's the best ya got for wanting me to put up $750,000 just to have the thing on call for a couple of months?

Let's consider this: the Mars was used in 2003 and the result was the loss of 238 homes. The AT's were used in Smith Creek and the result was the loss of 0 homes.

[antelee]

The Martin Mars is awesome, and there is nothing wrong with nostalgia, which unfortunately comes at a very steep price.

As impressive as it is, now this would be my dream job ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaUDs48h2ns

BEAUTIFUL!!

[my5cents]

........ When asked about the statistical analysis that proves the Air Tractors better fighters, the old lady being interviewed could only come back with "I don't believe it because it could be a government lie." That's the best ya got for wanting me to put up $750,000 just to have the thing on call for a couple of months?

Let's consider this: the Mars was used in 2003 and the result was the loss of 238 homes. The AT's were used in Smith Creek and the result was the loss of 0 homes.

I think the old lady's logic, that basically:

"if the government is in favor of something it must be wrong, because they always lie"

is superior to your logic that:

"the Mars was used in 2003 and the result was the loss of 238 homes. The AT's were used in Smith Creek and the result was the loss of 0 homes"

It's called "Cause and effect logic", When the rooster crows, the sun rises. Therefore, the rooster causes the sun to rise.

[Rwede]

^^^ Of course you would think that. And vote NDP. Vive la différence!

[antelee]

^^^ Of course you would think that. And vote NDP. Vive la différence!

As that "old lady" votes, believe me!

[mexi cali]

Let's consider this: the Mars was used in 2003 and the result was the loss of 238 homes. The AT's were used in Smith Creek and the result was the loss of 0 homes.

While the numbers may be correct, apples and lemons.

[LoneWolf_53]

Let's consider this: the Mars was used in 2003 and the result was the loss of 238 homes. The AT's were used in Smith Creek and the result was the loss of 0 homes.

While the numbers may be correct, apples and lemons.

Hardly! Fire is fire, so if the MM is such a wonderful be all end all tool of aerial fire assault, how come so many homes were lost?

I mean heck, a couple of passes dropping that gigantic payload of water, and the fire should have been out, to hear the Smith Creek fire whiners that were on the news tell it at least.

For all you know less homes might have been lost, had they used the current aircraft, that's more maneuverable and versatile, thus possibly better able to deal with the many locations the fire jumped, in a more timely fashion.

Of course none of that matters when you're fixated on blindly defending an antique.

[Treblehook]

My guess is the experts in wildfire management, including those in the business of dropping water and fire retardant, were involved [and provided input into] the decision regarding what types of aircraft were most suited for fighting fires in British Columbia. The fact that there isn't an outcry about the discontinued contract for the MM, from the those involved in delivering the service, says a lot. What is so difficult to understand about the fact that these are very old aircraft that are expensive to maintain and operate; require a minimal crew of four plus others on the ground for support; are significantly restricted in terms of where they can operate due to terrain and the size of lakes needed for pickup, etc. Add to that the fact that the operators of the airplane obviously found it financially impossible to function under anything but a full blown contract.

[my5cents]

Hardly! Fire is fire, so if the MM is such a wonderful be all end all tool of aerial fire assault, how come so many homes were lost?

I mean heck, a couple of passes dropping that gigantic payload of water, and the fire should have been out, to hear the Smith Creek fire whiners that were on the news tell it at least.

For all you know less homes might have been lost, had they used the current aircraft, that's more maneuverable and versatile, thus possibly better able to deal with the many locations the fire jumped, in a more timely fashion.

Of course none of that matters when you're fixated on blindly defending an antique.

Do you use this logic in your daily life ?