Name a part of the country that isn’t subject to natural disaster. What you’re doing here is fundamentally the same as the people who objected to Katrina relief because “they shouldn’t have been living below sea level”, the people who pooh-poohed relief for Oklahoma because “they shouldn’t have been living in Tornado Alley”, and the people who’ll eventually object to relief when Mt. Rainer erupts (hopefully not anytime soon) because “they shouldn’t have been living in the path of a lahar”.
This is a pretty key point. I’ve done a little surfing around since the accident and deaths are surprisingly rare considering the risk level of the profession. Maybe those little shake’n’bake bags along with the other precautions they take are sufficient and we’re all falling victim to the fact that 18 deaths at the same time hits us emotionally harder than 18 spread over a couple of years.
Ok so please draw me a map of which areas the people should be on their own and which areas get help. Live near a forest and there happens to be a drought? You are out of luck. Should people in the inner city not get police protection? They made the choice to be in a high crime area. People who live in old buildings shouldn’t get fire protection because they should live in safer buildings. No one should live in California. No one should live on the coast. No one should live near a forest. No one should live on the Plains. Hope we all can fit in Maine. Added benefit, no venomous snakes.
spring loaded tent that has a bottom so it’s completely sealed with layers that can be injected with foam from a can.
Just as an FYI, smoke is the most likely killer in this situation. If they are stuck on a hill then 80 mph smoke is going to overtake them almost instantly.
This kind of thing doesn’t happen often; when was the last time you heard of as many forest firefighters killed like this?
How much money would it take to make sure that tiny number in the grand scheme of things doesn’t get killed next time.
Solution in search of a problem, is what it sounds like to me.
as for protecting property, assuming the place is prone to forest fires, could a zoning law requiring a dead zone along the perimeter work?
A) How does a Kawasaki mule get air dropped into a fire?
B) How long before the tires on it are melted (read instantly to not long enough to be of use)
C) What good does some hard to move trailer do when they are constantly in motion? The sheer idea of having it goes against why they are even there to begin with
D) I think you fail to understand the way these squads operate. In a perfect world they would have had 500 gallons of high pressure water, full flame suits, etc but that his diametrically opposed to the environment and scenario they are asked to operate in.
There was a show on Discovery last month called The Big Brain Theory: Pure Genius : that featured some young engineers (some from MIT). One of their challenges was to design a fire shelter for forest firefighters. They had some good ideas.
They could use the old idea of a WWII pup tent. There were two pieces required to assemble the tent. Each soldier carried one piece.
Perhaps a six piece fire shelter could be designed. Each firefighter carries one folded up panel in his pack. But, the firefighters would need time to assemble the shelter.
I know people have repeatedly said there is only a 30 second period to save your life. So that pretty much gives time to say a prayer and die. Theres not a hell of lot that can be done.
Seriously. The whole reason we have firefighters in the first place is to protect property from fire. That is the entire purpose of their existence. It seems silly to up and claim that losing a few houses is acceptable if it keeps firemen safe from harm. Who gets to draw the line and say that THESE houses were built foolishly and are therefore on their own, and THESE houses were built sensibly and we’ll go ahead and protect them?
As long as its me drawing the line I have no problem with it. 
No, it’s not the same. There is a huge difference in that with most other natural disasters the relief is being given after the damage is done. In the case of flooding we do have people out there sandbagging, etc., but they aren’t putting their lives in danger to the extent that these firefighters do to try and save houses.
This was hashed out in the last Charter Members quarterly planning meeting. Until Dopers can exercise some sort of fiscal constraint, budgets must be curtailed.
It does not seem unreasonable to me that people living in high and constant risk areas live in homes built to withstand or avoid those risks. 95% of our problems in fire/tornado/hurricane prone areas has to do with our obsession with cheap ass above ground housing. if we built Hobbit holes instead the fire/hurricane/tornado would just roll right over, and we would save piles of money on heating/cooling. Granted the upfront cost for these homes would be higher.
Perhaps not but I’m sure as hell putting Tornado Valley on my bucket list of awesome places to visit!
Sometimes there isn’t a solution. Sometimes the best we can come up with still falls far short. Is that the case here? I don’t know. But just declaring that there exists a solution to some problem does not make it so.
It’s easy to suggest some hare-brained plan that won’t work. It’s also easy to say “well, ok, then you figure it out” when more-informed people point out the obvious flaws. It’s hard to come up with an actually workable plan that is better than what we have now. It might even be impossible. You can’t bargain with reality.
That’s what I love about the internet. A bunch of people trying to come up with solutions to problems they have no actual background in solving.
The most obvious solution is to tear down all these dangerous inflammable forests near people’s homes and replace them with aesthetically pleasing un-inflammable concrete. But NO. Stupid Liberals would rather put firefighters lives in danger!
Or have firefighters wear suits made out of space shuttle tile.
I don’t care what kind of miracle fabric or whatever you can come up with, it’s not gonna stop the air inside from heating up and cooking the inhabitants. If everything outside is 800ºC, it’s not gonna take long for the inside of your best Igloo cooler to heat up as well.
On the other hand, it would make a great outdoor convection oven for large cookouts.
They need suits like this one. It kept Mr. Spock going in the middle of a volcano; it should work in a forest fire. Unfortunately, it’s (a) 250 years away, and (b) it’s Star Trek tech. 
