🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3e373697$0$8831$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, 
"Terry Russell" <trochilus@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>"Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>news:KCBZ9.35338$jM5.90040@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
>> Which raises the question of what is the best type of "fire fighting
>unit"?
>> I assume that country fire trucks were originally merely an extension of
>> metropolitan means of fire fighting - they need roads or similar access;
>> carry water, which is heavy; and hoses.
>> Bushfires are often in inaccessible terrain, can move with considerable
>> speed, etc.  This is where aerial attack seems much the best method.  Fire
>> trucks are alright in open terrain.
>> Water is a scarce resource.  What does it do? Smother the fire, and dampen
>> the fuel.  Any alternatives? Probably not.
>
>None really, apart from prayer, it can't hurt.
>
>Water falls from the sky, plants grow, water stops, plants dry,
>water stops for a long time, everything burns.
>
>There isn't a lot you can do to stop that cycle.
>There is nothing you can do to completely protect large areas
>of fuel.

Well you could burn it more frequently and at a better time of year 
for controlling the blaze.

Although this is the sort of thing that the aborigines did to manage 
the landscape, it occurs to me that maybe they didn't just do it to 
facilitate hunting etc. as we've been told.  Given the sort of fires 
you get down in southern Oz at this time of year, wouldn't surprise me 
to learn that the locals used to burn as a matter of community 
survival as much as for any other reason.

>The only real strategy is hit spot fires with everything available before
>they can develop. That takes time and costs to have machines and people on
>standby for long periods over wide areas.
>There are hundreds of smaller fires stopped without much fanfare for
>each major fire that takes hold. Each one costs time and effort.
>
>If that fails then the fire teams clench their magnificent buttocks and
>protect high
>value items only, and hope there are assets left for the next fire coming
>from the other direction, and spot fires 5km behind the line.
>You stop a fire today, the same area is still fuel waiting to burn tomorrow.
>
>Not even a solid line of carriers backed by a river could stop a full storm,
>they just spot over the river.
>
>A very light rain from local clouds passing by can do the same job in
>a few minutes as thousands of people with hundreds of tankers.
>
>A 4 tonne mechanical cloud can give a light drizzle , at 1kg/m**2 = 1mm
>50x80 metres, similar to a road tanker but much more expensive to
>operate. On a 40C day that area is ready to burn again in an hour,
>with 50km/hr winds a fire wouldn't even stop at the edges, just
>burn right through and spot over.
>
>
>There should be more of them, there are a lot of things that could be
>done better in a perfect world with unlimited finances.
>
>Maybe in the future pilotless drones and robots could move quicker,
>be on standby cheaper and do the dangerous work
>...something for you to work on  ;-)


Cheers, Phred.

-- 
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID