Dc-10 Firebomber

[Heli Ops]

Nearly fell off my ladder (if I was on one) when I was out at Victorville today. Went into a hangar to have a look at another cool project when I spied this. :shock:

 

Yes its a DC-10-10 and its being converted into a firebomber with external tanks, three of the same tanks on the Erickson Aircrane. You can see two of them lined up beside the aircraft and I even shot the attachment points where it is going to go. Got some other shots of the inside of the aircraft and it looks amazing.

 

Anyway enjoy these.

 

 

[Heli Ops]

 

[Guest Bullet Remington]

Ned:

 

Thanks great pix!

 

Makes one wonder, just who or whom has the budget to pay for this thing on a fire??

 

This person/company wouldn't have a couple of wonky relatives living in Australia would they???

 

Just fortifies everything I've always said. If a person has deep enough pockets, I can find a way to put anything they want on an aircraft, and make it legal.

 

Man, someone or somebodies have reaaalllyyy deep pockets!

 

Have any more of those pix? I'd love to see them.

 

BR

[cap]

Someone knows something then that CONAIR doesn't know or couldn't get an answer to then. Their R & D with the 737, doing the same thing, cam to an end because of the "fuel burn" at lower altitudes. I can just imagine what it would be with a DC-10 and it would have the same problem as the MARS......drop high or snap massive trees off like toothpicks.

[shaggy]

the 747 was evergreens. i think the vid is available on their website.

[Charles W.]

Cap :

 

There are many other issues when dropping fire retardent from aircraft that come into play when aircraft such as a large jet are used, one of which is the atomization of the liquid as it hits the airflow at high speeds, around 140 knots you start having problems with the load losing effectiveness due to smashing the liquid into particles that are to small for effective coating of the fuel and poor penetration of tree foliage...and of coures there is the manouvering of a large jet at low airspeeds and low altitude.

 

For what ever it is worth to this conversation I tried playing with this senario with the A320 simulator at the Airbus factory in Toulouse some years ago...I finally ended up crashing the thing trying to pick up a wing at a Vref 0f 140 knots, the whore just wouldnt pick up the wing fast enough due to the computers having limitations on the side controller input that I used when I tried to keep the wing from hitting the ground....anyhow when the Sim crashed it was quite spectacular.

 

Then again maybe this is just boring to my fling wing brethern..... but some of you may understand my feelings because it was so realistic that I thought I had died and knew I was not in heaven because in my sub conscious mind the first person I saw was Cruella De Ville.....

 

Rev. C.W.

[cap]

Chuck ------ I'm with you all the way and that was one of the other major problems that had to be contended with at CONAIR. Getting down into the area of stall speeds can get critical and manoevering can get "dicey" if the specific action is going to effect the A/S. I'm also wondering whether the "vortex effect" from an a/c that size would have an effect. Fully loaded, I've seen the video of the experiiment they did with smoke to demonstrate the vortex off-of a 747 and I knew it was bad, but Holy cow, it's impressive even at low altitudes and with everything hangin' out to slow'er down and stay airborne.

 

It would definitely have to be a "ground-based" loading system, otherwise I'd like to see the price on the set of floats for that a/c.

[Charles W.]

Yeh, Cap isn't it strange how some of us has beens can get past the glamour and sexy images of these things and root out some concerns related to physics and operational concerns with these new ideas?

 

Reverend Chas W.

[cap]

Chuck ----- I wonder if it has something to do with a certain red light flashing and/or certain audio sounds, together with "mushy" controls......maybe? I wonder what the stall speed is on a DC-10 or 747?.........I know it's lower than one would think, but 120kts gotta be getting in the "call out the forking A/S partner because we're near the 'fence'" :shock: . I think it would be a bit morre than the CAT, eh?

 

"Has beens?"........not QUITE just yet, but we are reaching "warp speed" though.

[Sexual Chocolate]

YEAH, if anyone wants to check out a 747 dropping loads of water, check out:

 

http://www.evergreenaviation.com/supertanker/index.html

 

The vids are great!!! :up: