WIX Archives

You are all wrong....

Posted by Joe Scheil on Sun Dec 08, 2002 12:49:17 PM

In reply top Hawkins & Powers (HP) PB4Y-2s Grounded posted by Kent on Sat Dec 07, 2002 04:00:28 PM

Its always the same thing, ground those old airplanes before they hurt someone...ect. First some facts about the airtanker life. This is a rant...

1. No aircraft was designed for the job you are about to do. The B-17 made a good tanker, but structural problems grounded it, as has happened to the PB4Y. There is NO aircraft that can handle the loads of firefighting without cracking wings. NOT ONE. P3's, DC-7's and P2's all have cracks, the USFS is just being selective about grounding. Will "new" C-130's work, H models perhaps? Only for now, as they are tougher than the A's but will still eventually fail, based on the budgets of the operators at the current levels. PBY's due to their speed never seemed to have wing failures, but scooping is a hazardous activity as well. Cracks are a way of life, structural repair must be aggressivly preosecuted, as with all aircraft. No Airtanker has ever joined the fleet without being at least 25 years old anyway. The problem is becoming one of rarity. There are no more "older" airframes in store, and the newer aircraft were not built to the same standard in many ways. Go ahead, name some types that are available for conversion...They are even doing Convairs now! In any case don't tell me one of the new C-130's or P3's will out tough a DC-7 when they both have to carry 3000 gal of retardant at 9.2 lbs per gallon. All of them will be at limits, and one costs under a few hundred grand. Guess which one an operator can afford. I'd rather they had new planes, but where does the money come from, the USAF/RAF can't afford the new 130's anyway, and the design has major problems. The best boat in my mind would be a Beriev... but see below.


2. low level mountain aerobatics does not happen. The aircraft are flown SMART as possible into a turbulent and dynamic environment. You begin to know where to go to minimise TB, and do your best to keep the airplane unloaded.
It still beats airplanes up, but Patrol aircraft VP types are good because they are supposed to be at low level, and are able to work down there..PB4Y, P2V, P3 ect..

3. The PB4Y is not a B-24. They can be modified static to look like a B-24, but that is a disservice to the 4Y and its war record. The Smithsonian should have a mint tri-color PB4Y RATHER THAN a B-24. The B-17 can represent the 8th, but the Pacific theatre patrol bomber has no real rep. Support the PB4Y. As for the money, well who knows what it will cost to buy and fly one again...

Exception: The CL-215 and 415T, as well as some Chinese and Russian built things (Beriev) are the only real aircraft designed (sort of) for the job. Since the USFS or BLM don't AND won't consider them, they are off limits, and really do not exist.

Sorry to rant, but I think that this job is the least undestood thing that vintage aircraft do.

JOE

Follow Ups: