# Firefighting air tanker question. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [May 4, 2014, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627 "2014-05-04T10:25:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/21 "2014-05-07T09:18:31Z")
[video of high pressure system.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTpz5b-u53I&feature=youtu.be) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c57346/32.png) [@Little\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/22 "2014-05-07T09:56:26Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > [video of high pressure system.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTpz5b-u53I&feature=youtu.be) Impressive Magiver. But I gotta ask, would that work against a wind swept, rampaging fire? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c57346/32.png) [@Little\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/23 "2014-05-07T09:58:40Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > While, yeah, like everyone has said there aren’t quite as many low-n-slow big payload airplanes on the used market as there were after WWII, other countries have no problems developing firefighting aircraft based on the current used plane market. The problems in the US really are more bureaucratic and legislative than practical. This says a lot. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c57346/32.png) [@Little\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/24 "2014-05-07T10:02:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Evergreen went out of business last year. Figures. Thanks. Wonder what they did with their planes … ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/25 "2014-05-07T10:16:48Z")
> [@Little\_Pig](#): > > Impressive Magiver. But I gotta ask, would that work against a wind swept, rampaging fire? anywhere where people are already fighting them on the ground. Basically it’s just an atomizing of water so it provides more cooling effect. It’s a more efficient use of water allowing a given supply of it to go further. Would be interesting if an Ag plane could utilize the technique with waste pressure from a turbine engine. Not sure how close you can get to a fire with all the updrafts. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/26 "2014-05-07T10:23:15Z")
Oh, actually as it turns out there was an article that just came out today about the debacle with the BAE-146’s: [Missoula's Neptune Aviation awaits next-gen air tanker contract decision](http://missoulian.com/news/local/missoula-s-neptune-aviation-awaits-next-gen-air-tanker-contract/article_4d0389ac-d57d-11e3-b57c-0019bb2963f4.html). The Montana company actually has _five_ of them but the Forest Service only has a funded contract for one. There’s another company in Nevada that has one more with a funded contract, but it has certification problems. So, yeah, the problem _isn’t_ finding the planes. There’s six brand-new (to them) jet slurry bombers mostly ready to go, it’s just that red tape is keeping five of them grounded. Fortunately right now the fire season is looking like it probably won’t be too bad (knock on non-inflamed wood), but hopefully if things do heat up they can speed things along. Sucks to be the company that bought all the planes, though! ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/27 "2014-05-07T10:24:31Z")
> [@Little\_Pig](#): > > Figures. Thanks. Wonder what they did with their planes … no update on the ownership of N479EV. Still shows Evergreen. It’s a 100 series which is about as old as they get (1970). It’s seriously old. I can’t remember the last time I saw a one. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/28 "2014-05-07T17:20:00Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > And, very oddly, it looks a lot like [this](http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/z8dneO2-Xcs/maxresdefault.jpg); coming soon to a theater near you. Not so odd. I haven’t seen the movie, but I understand the animators took pains to make the airplanes resemble real ones. While there are composites, the general shapes remain. The plane in the link resembles the [Cessna AGtruck](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_188) and the [Piper Pawnee](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_Pawnee). ---
**Author:** ![swampspruce](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/swampspruce/32/261_2.png) [@swampspruce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/swampspruce)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/29 "2014-05-07T20:53:59Z")
Here are some other options all in one [vid](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeUHUKmxTos). CL415, Mil-8, Air Tractor as mentioned above. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/30 "2014-05-07T21:15:55Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > anywhere where people are already fighting them on the ground. Basically it’s just an atomizing of water so it provides more cooling effect. It’s a more efficient use of water allowing a given supply of it to go further. Would be interesting if an Ag plane could utilize the technique with waste pressure from a turbine engine. Not sure how close you can get to a fire with all the updrafts. Watch the video again. There is foam mixed with the water. It isn’t just high pressure water. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/31 "2014-05-07T23:14:18Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > Not so odd. I haven’t seen the movie, but I understand the animators took pains to make the airplanes resemble real ones. While there are composites, the general shapes remain. The plane in the link resembles the [Cessna AGtruck](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_188) and the [Piper Pawnee](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_Pawnee). Yes, but neither of those are on floats. It looks even more like an [Air Tractor AT-802 Fire Boss conversion](http://www.firebossllc.com/images/gallery/006.jpg). When I saw the first preview for the movie, I thought that plane never got past the first prototype. I was stunned that the animators even knew about it. There are clearly a few more now, but still not many. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/32 "2014-05-07T23:17:05Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > Watch the video again. There is foam mixed with the water. It isn’t just high pressure water. read the literature. It can be both. The idea is to atomize the water as much as possible. Fine mist cools the area faster and heat is one of the conditions needed for fire. The video was a chemical fire. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627/33 "2014-05-07T23:59:20Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > What surprises me is that they haven’t moved forward with water-jet technology. They found years ago that water under high pressure is extremely effective at putting out fires. This technology was put to use in the Iraq war when the Kuwaiti oil fields were set ablaze. > > By high pressure I mean water pushed into a mist. It had a much greater effect than the same volume of water sprayed conventionally. > > [This is what I’m talking about.](http://fire.kovatch.com/uhp) Keep in mind that with big forest fires, the idea generally isn’t to extinguish the fire (which would be essentially impossible) but to contain it. That means that for the most part, they’re dropping water or retardant in the path of the fire not directly on it. The big reason why the Forest Service prefers retardant is that unlike water it doesn’t evaporate and so can be dropped at a safer distance from the fire. I’d imagine misted water would probably be even worse in that regard. It could still be of some use in the limited situations where they do attack the fire directly like when they’re defending dwellings or putting out a fresh start, but not for most day-to-day firefighting. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighting-air-tanker-question/687627.md?page=1)