I've seen some massive forest fires in my day and they're pretty spectacular. They use the lake by my house to dip the planes in to collect the water and just seeing that is pretty amazing.
Still though...dumbasses
Still though...dumbasses
cali's got a whole ocean to the left!!S3v3N wrote:
Its not, You need a big ass lake. Helicopters with dip buckets work better.m3thod wrote:
Ages ago i saw it on TV a plane would fly over a lake and skim the surface and pick up a whole belly full. and then go let rip over the fire. Rinse and repeat.S3v3N wrote:
Do you have any idea how much one load of Retardent Costs?
Not to mention Aircraft can't always fly, And a load of retardent doesn't do jack and shit when a fire is roaring in double or triple canopy.
Boots on the ground cutting fire lines puts out forrest fires.. Not aircraft dropping water and retardent.
Seemed effective.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Not cost effective, when your fire is 400miles in land.. Fly out drop a load, refuel. pickup water. dump on fire.. refuel..m3thod wrote:
cali's got a whole ocean to the left!!S3v3N wrote:
Its not, You need a big ass lake. Helicopters with dip buckets work better.m3thod wrote:
Ages ago i saw it on TV a plane would fly over a lake and skim the surface and pick up a whole belly full. and then go let rip over the fire. Rinse and repeat.
Seemed effective.
When 60 guys can cut a long fire line in a matter of hours, then light a backfire.. hey lookie a flank contained.
Oh and a Part I forgot about is this, Thanks to the EPA and The fucking Hippies.. we have to get expressed authorized permission to even use Retardent.. then have to do an Environmental impact study to see if the retardent will stunt growth of the fucking forrest that just burnt..
I'll pop in here later.. I'm headed out with a crew to do a survey of the last fire we had.
Oh right.. and they were supported by the Saudi Government. AWESOME!.. who needs the Carter Doctrine when you just gave us the prefect reason to invade and take all of their oil..Stubbee wrote:
Yeah buds.Kmarion wrote:
You have a point. But we can make do without Iranian oil. We have our buds the Saudi's.
Most 9/11 hijackers were Sauds.
Osama is a Saud.
You 'buds' are fucking your wives up the ass while selling you shit you should be weaning yourselves off of
oops I went on a tangent.
You went somewhere alright.. oops.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Why when there is a better one available?m3thod wrote:
GET THAT MOTHERFUCKING PLANE YOU BASTARDS.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Is the Russian plane free?
If not, I have a hard time believing we are not spending the money to buy a plane. They must not want THAT plane. Pretty much that makes this a bunch of BS.
If not, I have a hard time believing we are not spending the money to buy a plane. They must not want THAT plane. Pretty much that makes this a bunch of BS.
http://www.katu.com/home/related/41917222.htmlPug wrote:
Is the Russian plane free?
If not, I have a hard time believing we are not spending the money to buy a plane. They must not want THAT plane. Pretty much that makes this a bunch of BS.
tbh
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm pretty sure people would be calling 911 if they saw that LOL
yeah Im sure thats wut they would doTopHat01 wrote:
In certain parts...but who knows, they might load that thing with a nuke and declare WWIII.=NHB=Shadow wrote:
Wow we could so use that here in California every year, damnit USA you suck.
Can never be too paranoid.
Woah shit that's awesome.Kmarion wrote:
http://www.katu.com/home/related/41917222.htmlPug wrote:
Is the Russian plane free?
If not, I have a hard time believing we are not spending the money to buy a plane. They must not want THAT plane. Pretty much that makes this a bunch of BS.
tbh
fuck youKmarion wrote:
Why when there is a better one available?m3thod wrote:
GET THAT MOTHERFUCKING PLANE YOU BASTARDS.
2003 .. good year.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?Red Forman wrote:
forest fires are good for the forest. boo hoo for the rich people and their million dollar homes.
Wealth envy at its finest.
you think most of them earned and built it is where we part companylowing wrote:
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?Red Forman wrote:
forest fires are good for the forest. boo hoo for the rich people and their million dollar homes.
Wealth envy at its finest.
Not when the fuck whits refuse to clearcut atlast 30 feet away from the house.lowing wrote:
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?Red Forman wrote:
forest fires are good for the forest. boo hoo for the rich people and their million dollar homes.
Wealth envy at its finest.
Or refuse us to do it for them for structure protection.. then beg and plead for us to come put their house out when its on fire.
Fuck 'em.
I see, so they should be burned out because some of them might have inherited their possessions instead of their parents leaving it all to you.Red Forman wrote:
you think most of them earned and built it is where we part companylowing wrote:
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?Red Forman wrote:
forest fires are good for the forest. boo hoo for the rich people and their million dollar homes.
Wealth envy at its finest.
and what business is it of yours exactly, what other people have?
Thats funny, I have the same attitude toward those in New Orleans during Katrina, and I was called a racist for it.S3v3N wrote:
Not when the fuck whits refuse to clearcut atlast 30 feet away from the house.lowing wrote:
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?Red Forman wrote:
forest fires are good for the forest. boo hoo for the rich people and their million dollar homes.
Wealth envy at its finest.
Or refuse us to do it for them for structure protection.. then beg and plead for us to come put their house out when its on fire.
Fuck 'em.
I do agree, anyone hindering the effort should lose.
why should my tax money go to protect their toys?lowing wrote:
I see, so they should be burned out because some of them might have inherited their possessions instead of their parents leaving it all to you.Red Forman wrote:
you think most of them earned and built it is where we part companylowing wrote:
We part company with this post, you think that people who earn and built wealth somehow do not deserve to have their property protected or saved?
Wealth envy at its finest.
and what business is it of yours exactly, what other people have?
Because they are tax payers as well, probably more so than you.Red Forman wrote:
why should my tax money go to protect their toys?lowing wrote:
I see, so they should be burned out because some of them might have inherited their possessions instead of their parents leaving it all to you.Red Forman wrote:
you think most of them earned and built it is where we part company
and what business is it of yours exactly, what other people have?
Why should my tax dollars pay for those that pay no taxes?
Last edited by lowing (2009-08-25 19:33:55)
oh ok. so, assuming they do pay their taxes, i should be content with paying for thier mountain side home in the middle of a fire zone? rogerlowing wrote:
Because they are tax payers as well, probably more so than you.
Why should my tax dollars pay for those that pay no taxes?
Red, I'm betting they pay shit loads in property taxes.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
They take the same risk as the tards that live in Tornado Alley
Or the same ppl who live along the banks of the mighty miss, hurricane prone gulf coast states, blizzard prone northern states...S3v3N wrote:
They take the same risk as the tards that live in Tornado Alley
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I had high hopes for you, but I can see I am going to be disappointed.Red Forman wrote:
oh ok. so, assuming they do pay their taxes, i should be content with paying for thier mountain side home in the middle of a fire zone? rogerlowing wrote:
Because they are tax payers as well, probably more so than you.
Why should my tax dollars pay for those that pay no taxes?
But using your "logic" I was supposed to be happy paying for homes that were built 50 ft below sea level NEXT TO THE SEA!! So, again the difference please.
All I see is wealth envy from your posts.