In this video Conair’s RJ-85 and Coulson’s C-130Q air tankers are seen dropping retardant on a bushfire near Moyston, Victoria in Australia, January 2, 2015. The C-130Q is first, followed two minutes later by the RJ-85. These aircraft are known as “bombers” or “water bombers” in Australia and were on contract for the Australian summer in 2014/2015. As of March 12, 2015, the C-130Q has completed its contract and is over the Pacific en route back to North America. The RJ-85 is also done with their contract, but before they can depart they have to install some fuel bladders, due to the limited fuel range of the aircraft.
Video of a C-130Q and RJ-85 dropping on a fire in Victoria, Australia
- Bill Gabbert
Comments
More in Fire Aviation News
9 Comments
Yes,
3500 gallons for the C-130 vs. 3300 gallons in the RJ85
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/global-sustainment/product-support/2013-hoc-presentations/2013-HOC-Tuesday/Tues%201145%20Coulson%20Aviation.pdf
http://conair.ca/conair_fleet/rj85at
Thanks Rob. My math was a bit shaky there.
Andy, yes, the Hercules carries almost 50% more than the RJ. We can only assume from the video that both planes dropped using identical coverage levels, as that of course influences the length of a given drop.
As an aside, the RJ dropped without the benefit of a lead-in! Both planes dropped only two minutes apart. How is that even possible? Was the instruction as simple as “tag on and extend the previous drop”?!? How reckless! How daring! How…how…how efficient and easy.
USFS, take note.
I have to ask. On the C130 drop in the video, why don’t they drop closer to the fire line?
Not being a fire professional I don’t know for sure, but I noticed that by the time the RJ came around to extend the line of the previous drop the fire was rather close to the line. I wonder if the 130 had dropped closer first whether it would have been safe/reasonable/possible to extend the drop line. One certainly would not have wanted the fire to have flanked the first line before the second drop
Thanks – that makes sense.
One thing we don’t know is exactly how much retardant was loaded into the
firstsecond air tanker, the RJ-85. While it has a maximum capacity of 3,300 gallons, it may not have carried that much due to density altitude issues.Do you mean the second airtanker? The first to drop was the Herc; the following was the RJ. Of course we can only assume that both airtankers were full when they began to drop. It’s possible one or both airplanes were downloaded due to density altitude: even though the Avalon base has a 10,000′ runway at essentially sea level, the afternoon temps on 02 January 2015 in Geelong peaked at over 40C, with westerly winds gusting to 30km/hr (runway oriented N-S). I’m not sure if those conditions warrant taking off with less than a full load.
Keen observation Kevin9! One of the challenges of grass or light fuel fire is the speed of which they move. Through a combination of experience, skill and luck(ratio will vary constantly) one can more or less accurately predict where your load needs to go in order to give the next guy(s) inline enough time to “tag on and extend” without the fire front advancing past the end of load number 1. Time and time again we tend to forget about this and first grass fire of the year the first load goes “half on half off” which looks fantastic and makes the pilot feel like his A game has made its appearance early. Alas, my son, you have pooched it. By time the next guy gets in the fire has advanced and now load number one is a footnote in the history of said fire usually remembered by every pilot as they fly over the blackened scorched earth with one long line of green in the middle of it. This is all third hand information of coarse ’cause I have never ever eeeeeeeeeevvverrrrrrrr witnessed such atrocities…………since last spring.
Comments are closed for this article!