Airtanker Help?
- Graham Adder
- Guru
- Posts: 5492
- Joined: Apr 14th, 2009, 9:51 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
gman313 wrote:see I was thinking we just need to pull the plug. Somewhere down there has got to be a little tiny bath plug.....then it's china's problem
dayum
yoo smart
-
- Übergod
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Jun 11th, 2005, 10:00 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
What if we all flushed at once?
- OldIslander
- Board Meister
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Apr 23rd, 2014, 10:48 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
This one was fun. (Please feel free to check/critique my math). Sorry for mixing imperial & metric -- I'm an old guy...
Okanagan lake's surface is approx. 135.5 sq. miles. That's (135.5 X 27,878,400) sq. feet.
The upper 1" of the lake contains (( 135.5 X 27,878,400) x 144) cu. in. which divided by 61, gives the number of litres = 8,917,431,816 -- almost 9 billion.
So lets hire a fleet of Martin Mars water bombers. Each has a capacity of 27,200 litres which it skims from the surface without landing. Let's assume each can make 50 lake skims per day (which is pretty much impossible, but for the sake of arguement....). And we want the lake level reduced by one inch in one week.
At 50 skimmed loads per day, 1 Martin Mars will remove 1,360,000 litres of water per day.
To figure out how many Martin Mars we need to do this:
(8,917,431,816 / 1,360,000) / 7 days = 936
We'll assume none of the dumped water runs back into the lake and that we can shut off all the rivers and creeks draining into the lake, while the skimming is occurring. (We'll also ignore evaporation which 'helps' this operation).
So we'd need a fleet of 936 Martin Mars water bombers, each making 50 skimming loads per day for 7 days to lower the lake level by 1 inch.
Okanagan lake's surface is approx. 135.5 sq. miles. That's (135.5 X 27,878,400) sq. feet.
The upper 1" of the lake contains (( 135.5 X 27,878,400) x 144) cu. in. which divided by 61, gives the number of litres = 8,917,431,816 -- almost 9 billion.
So lets hire a fleet of Martin Mars water bombers. Each has a capacity of 27,200 litres which it skims from the surface without landing. Let's assume each can make 50 lake skims per day (which is pretty much impossible, but for the sake of arguement....). And we want the lake level reduced by one inch in one week.
At 50 skimmed loads per day, 1 Martin Mars will remove 1,360,000 litres of water per day.
To figure out how many Martin Mars we need to do this:
(8,917,431,816 / 1,360,000) / 7 days = 936
We'll assume none of the dumped water runs back into the lake and that we can shut off all the rivers and creeks draining into the lake, while the skimming is occurring. (We'll also ignore evaporation which 'helps' this operation).
So we'd need a fleet of 936 Martin Mars water bombers, each making 50 skimming loads per day for 7 days to lower the lake level by 1 inch.
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” Ernest Benn
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3538
- Joined: Sep 15th, 2008, 8:03 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
OldIslander wrote:This one was fun. (Please feel free to check/critique my math). Sorry for mixing imperial & metric -- I'm an old guy...
Okanagan lake's surface is approx. 135.5 sq. miles. That's (135.5 X 27,878,400) sq. feet.
The upper 1" of the lake contains (( 135.5 X 27,878,400) x 144) cu. in. which divided by 61, gives the number of litres = 8,917,431,816 -- almost 9 billion.
So lets hire a fleet of Martin Mars water bombers. Each has a capacity of 27,200 litres which it skims from the surface without landing. Let's assume each can make 50 lake skims per day (which is pretty much impossible, but for the sake of arguement....). And we want the lake level reduced by one inch in one week.
At 50 skimmed loads per day, 1 Martin Mars will remove 1,360,000 litres of water per day.
To figure out how many Martin Mars we need to do this:
(8,917,431,816 / 1,360,000) / 7 days = 936
We'll assume none of the dumped water runs back into the lake and that we can shut off all the rivers and creeks draining into the lake, while the skimming is occurring. (We'll also ignore evaporation which 'helps' this operation).
So we'd need a fleet of 936 Martin Mars water bombers, each making 50 skimming loads per day for 7 days to lower the lake level by 1 inch.
we already did the math with dc10 tankers - but ya - lot of planes making a lot of runs whether you use the dc10 or the martin mars - but the 10 still flies!
-
- Übergod
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Jun 11th, 2005, 10:00 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
Except the DC10 can't pick out of the lake.
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3937
- Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
gman313 wrote:
we already did the math with dc10 tankers - but ya - lot of planes making a lot of runs whether you use the dc10 or the martin mars - but the 10 still flies!
This thread is getting kind of silly. A DC-10 cannot scoop off a lake; its a retardent (land based) bomber only. There is also only one Martin Mars still flying and in-service today.
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3538
- Joined: Sep 15th, 2008, 8:03 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
it was meant to be silly
they can drop water or retardant but yes - filled from the ground and not scooped from the lake
they are not the most agile machines for fire fighting.
Take a look at the Convairs KF / Conair did - those are well built and agile aircraft - but only hold retardant.
they can drop water or retardant but yes - filled from the ground and not scooped from the lake
they are not the most agile machines for fire fighting.
Take a look at the Convairs KF / Conair did - those are well built and agile aircraft - but only hold retardant.
- kgcayenne
- Buddha of the Board
- Posts: 15018
- Joined: Aug 10th, 2005, 6:35 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
XT225 wrote: only one Martin Mars still flying and in-service today.
OldIslander wrote:So we'd need a fleet of 936 Martin Mars water bombers, each making 50 skimming loads per day for 7 days to lower the lake level by 1 inch.
DAMNIT! We're 935 Mars bombers short.
"without knowledge, he multiplies mere words."
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your kids.
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your kids.
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3937
- Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
gman313 wrote:it was meant to be silly
they can drop water or retardant but yes - filled from the ground and not scooped from the lake
they are not the most agile machines for fire fighting.
Take a look at the Convairs KF / Conair did - those are well built and agile aircraft - but only hold retardant.
Understood. Re sillyness, the Convairs, DC-10's, etc COULD drop huge loads of Kitty Litter into the lake; it would soak up lots of moisture! Might plug up the dams, though.
- OldIslander
- Board Meister
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Apr 23rd, 2014, 10:48 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
I assumed the OP was being silly on purpose...
Further with the DC-10, to make your 50 dumps per day, that's one every half hour. The water would have to be pumped into it from the lake -- that's 45,000 litres in approx. 5 minutes, to give it time to take off, fly to the dump zone, dump, fly back, and land.
It would make more sense to set up the pump near the SS Sicamous, and pump the lake water over the dam, into the okanagan river channel (ignoring the problems this might cause in Skaha...). This would also eliminate the approx. $22,000 (US) per hour operational cost of the DC-10 water tankers.
BTW, there are no operational Martin Mars anymore. Coulson Air Tankers doesn't have contracts for them, so is not flying them any more. They might be maintained to the point that they can be flown to their final destinations, when they are sold or donated.
Further with the DC-10, to make your 50 dumps per day, that's one every half hour. The water would have to be pumped into it from the lake -- that's 45,000 litres in approx. 5 minutes, to give it time to take off, fly to the dump zone, dump, fly back, and land.
It would make more sense to set up the pump near the SS Sicamous, and pump the lake water over the dam, into the okanagan river channel (ignoring the problems this might cause in Skaha...). This would also eliminate the approx. $22,000 (US) per hour operational cost of the DC-10 water tankers.
BTW, there are no operational Martin Mars anymore. Coulson Air Tankers doesn't have contracts for them, so is not flying them any more. They might be maintained to the point that they can be flown to their final destinations, when they are sold or donated.
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” Ernest Benn
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3937
- Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
OldIslander wrote:I assumed the OP was being silly on purpose...
It would make more sense to set up the pump near the SS Sicamous, and pump the lake water over the dam, into the okanagan river channel (ignoring the problems this might cause in Skaha...). This would also eliminate the approx. $22,000 (US) per hour operational cost of the DC-10 water tankers.
Why would you set up pumps near the SS Sicamous to pump over the dam? You obviously have not seen the dam lately; its not fully open; far from it. Nor is the one in Ok Falls (though that one WAS open fully for a while). Folks South of Penticton are the ones getting the break this year (as compared to Vernon, Kelowna, Summerland, Naramata, Penticton, etc).
- OldIslander
- Board Meister
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Apr 23rd, 2014, 10:48 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
XT225 wrote:Why would you set up pumps near the SS Sicamous to pump over the dam? You obviously have not seen the dam lately; its not fully open; far from it. Nor is the one in Ok Falls (though that one WAS open fully for a while). Folks South of Penticton are the ones getting the break this year (as compared to Vernon, Kelowna, Summerland, Naramata, Penticton, etc).
Well this was just a hypothetical exercise of lowering the lake -- pumping the water directly out and over the dam, vs pumping it into aircraft (at $22,000 US per hour....) and flying it away.
I'm surprised to hear that they are not releasing lots of water through the dam, behind the SS Sicamous -- doesn't make sense, if properties along the lake are flooding. What's the rational behind that?
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” Ernest Benn
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 3937
- Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 4:37 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
OldIslander wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that they are not releasing lots of water through the dam, behind the SS Sicamous -- doesn't make sense, if properties along the lake are flooding. What's the rational behind that?
Ask the experts; no idea. Perhaps the Water treaty with the Americans has something to do with how much water the Province can release into the system; who knows. What is clear now is IF the dam had been opened wider during the Winter, nobody would likely be in this mess right now. Of course nobody also had a crystal ball and foresaw the Spring storms or late melting snowpack either. I wouldn't want to be the guy responsible for controlling things.
- Queen K
- Queen of the Castle
- Posts: 70719
- Joined: Jan 31st, 2007, 11:39 am
Re: Airtanker Help?
Maybe I should fill up all the water vessels around here afterall.
As WW3 develops, no one is going to be dissing the "preppers." What have you done?
-
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 4700
- Joined: Mar 31st, 2010, 3:34 pm
Re: Airtanker Help?
XT225 wrote:OldIslander wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that they are not releasing lots of water through the dam, behind the SS Sicamous -- doesn't make sense, if properties along the lake are flooding. What's the rational behind that?
Ask the experts; no idea. Perhaps the Water treaty with the Americans has something to do with how much water the Province can release into the system; who knows. What is clear now is IF the dam had been opened wider during the Winter, nobody would likely be in this mess right now. Of course nobody also had a crystal ball and foresaw the Spring storms or late melting snowpack either. I wouldn't want to be the guy responsible for controlling things.
snowpack is melting the same as any other year nothing late about it