1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default CBC (national) - US/CDN bureaucrats re IL-76 waterbomber

    2 minutes of a 3 minute CBC Calgary story
    went national on Newsworld yesterday afternoon.

    Will bureau-speak and spin hold up much
    longer?

    Perhaps North America will finally procure
    a proven, catastrophe-mitigating tool?

    NATO photo: http://www.nato.int/pictures/2002/020925b/b020925g.jpg

    From Field Exercise "Bogorodsk 2002" in Noginsk,
    Russian Federation 25-27 September 2002

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Why don't you take a poll and see if anyone (other than you) actually noticed it?
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default

    I came here expecting people were interested
    in better firefighting.

    What I found was 'professionals more interested
    in circling the wagons than in better firefighting
    and disaster management.

    You remind me of one poster over at another board
    discussing the collapse of the wings on two US
    large air tankers prior to the retirement of all 33 from
    federal work. (8 safe ones have been re-instated after
    inspection.)

    The comment was Too bad somebody caught that on
    camera.
    As if to say there would probably be
    a whitewash and continued operation of dangerous
    equipment were it not for that citizen with the camera.

    That's like a 7-11 robber saying If the security camera
    wasn't on, we could have got away with it.


    Bonsey the bureaucrat says: The system is all; the system
    is infallible; Long live the system!


    Good luck, Allstate, say I.

    Oh - and by the way, Bonsey-the-bureaucrat: CBC is
    replaying that piece all weekend - nationally - while
    Canadians are fighting US fires with Canadian aircraft.
    The report preceding the disqualification of the US
    large tanker fleet indicates there's more integrity and
    safety in Canadian aviation operations.

    But of course, we knew that.

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default no firefighter solidarity

    "Even if the plane's [only] half as good as they say it is, I'd have it here this year."

    - Jim Harrison, Santa Barbara County, Calif., fire battalion chief

    Why not write Jim a flame?

    I'm sure you can get Chief Harrison's email if you try.

    Where do you live, Bonsey? Where it rains a lot?

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    If your mission in life is pimpin for/selling maintenance intensive, marginally reliable, commie airplanes why not go for the AN-124. The AN-124 is full generation newer, twice the payload and rough strip capable, AND available with real (Western) avionics.

    The IL-76 is a 1960s Soviet design - read WWII era American technology/and 1930s ag tractor quality levels. Repair parts conviently available from our efficient Russian Air Force Depot in West Bugtussle, Murmansk.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Any fires in Iowa these days?

    If your mission is to run down an
    airplane that's been in forest fire and
    other emergencies services for the Russian
    emergencies ministry for a decade and which
    is used by NATO, (CDN - Haiti - '04) and was
    ordered up in a pair for Los Alamos by FEMA,
    you can join the circle-the-wagons bureaucrats
    in these threads.

    Don't worry about maintenance. The aircraft comes
    ACMI. Oh, and check Jane's to see if your expertise
    on Soviet a/c bears out your thesis that those other
    candidates youmention have been tanked.

    Jane's sure has good things to say about the IL-76,
    including rough strip capable and STOL-like
    characteristics - more positive attributes than
    you can shake a bureaurat's binder at.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    I came here expecting people were interested in better firefighting
    Most are. And most don't agree that you are selling a better way.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Originally posted by Bones42
    ....most don't agree that you are selling a better way.
    I see that.

    I'm outa here. Too many bureaucrats for my taste.

    When I came here, one FH bureaucrat-poster (who has since put
    me on 'ignore') was posting stuff you can find just by going
    to GoogleNews and plugging in search terms like 'wildfire'
    or 'forest fire'

    Boring.

    If stuff is going to be discussed, why not go to
    TheySaidIt, where bureaucrat firefighters actually do talk
    back and forth?

    TheySaidIt doesn't allow Il-76 waterbomber postings.
    TheySaidIt does the status quo just as well as
    and in a lot of ways, better than Firehouse.com.

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    I'm outa here.
    I doubt it.
    TheySaidIt
    Never heard of it. Does it have a lot to do with firefighting?
    Too many bureaucrats
    I'd love to hear your definition of bureaucrat.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    VinnieB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    On the couch in my skivvies
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Originally posted by Bones42
    I doubt it.
    Never heard of it. Does it have a lot to do with firefighting?
    I'd love to hear your definition of bureaucrat.

    HA!..Yeah, This should be good. I would like to hear the same
    IACOJ Member

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Maybe we could pencil you both in
    for a meeting (as long as the system
    allows for such a thing).

    We're not here at this meeting going to
    discuss anything controversial like
    changing the system as the system is,
    as you are both aware, quite perfect
    the way it is.

    'The sure sign of a system in decay
    is one that does not self-correct.' Anonymous
    I borrowed the lead-in quote from this piece:

    Deplorable Safety Record of
    Firefighting Aircraft Scored in Report


    Why change something that has produced the stellar
    results indicated by that lead-in quote, eh?

    Quite remarkable how good it is, really, eh?
    Last edited by budthespud; 08-12-2004 at 07:34 PM.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    I'm outa here.
    3 days.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  13. #13
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Ah, Bud
    Get a life, okay?
    As you have amply pointed out, the system has already changed. Pretty disingenius of you to no complain that it hasn't, and wont.
    Hey, if you want more bang for the buck (and actually mean it!), why aren't you pushing the rigid airships? After all, they are being designed to hold up to 2 million gallons of retardant. That's the kind of rig the IL-76 could fill, right?
    Think I'm kidding? Check out:

    http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scite...dge020705.html

    Or does your "system" only include unapproved aircraft with wings?

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Approvals produced 33 retired large air tankers.

    Some free advice: Be more like Jim Harrison:*
    Set your pride aside. Get on with the business
    of protecting people.

    * "Even if the plane's [only] half as good
    as they say it is, I'd have it here this year."

    - Jim Harrison, Santa Barbara County, Calif., fire battalion chief.
    http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durable...p6s2-csm.shtml

    You're what I call a 4 percenter.

    You know what a 4 percenter is?

    When Michael Moran's Too Proud piece ran at MSNBC,
    an online survey was taken.

    94% of fifteen thousand people wanted to see
    Il-76 waterbomber. The piece ran to #1 at MSNBC.

    People like you voted with the 4 percenters:
    Solve American problems with American solutions.

    With all due respect, perhaps you didn't know. This
    whole thing looks like it's gone to Congress.
    Last edited by budthespud; 08-15-2004 at 09:51 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register