B737 Waterbomber crashes in south of W.A. Both pilots said to be not seriously injured but in hospital.

[Franky]

Juan Browne is onto it:

He was more than disparaging about the need to extinguish a fire in such an isolated place. Perhaps he should stick to his day job.

 

[JohnM]

He was more than disparaging about the need to extinguish a fire in such an isolated place. Perhaps he should stick to his day job.

I think it was more questioning the methodology - ie. using large jet water bombers at such low altitudes and speeds being inherently much more dangerous than he views as prudent for the situation.

I hasten to add that I'm not a pilot; I would like to hear comments from the pilots on the forum about his criticism.

The huge number of comments on his post was quite interesting, I thought. As usual, some seemed knowledgeable and thoughtful; others ignorant - of both the aviation and the landscape and broadly heathland vegetation in Fitzgerald River NP (ie. not towering eucalypt forest). The park is not really that isolated, but its interior is rather inaccessible by land because there are few tracks.

 

[Quickstatus]

Anyone remember DC6 water bombing in Victoria back in the 70s. Here is a Report

The benefit of large aircraft water bombing are fairly marginal with large risks.

Where they are of benefit are exactly where the Blancolirio Juan Browne YouTuber criticised them for operating - in remote inaccessible locations.

 

[jrfsp]

Anyone remember DC6 water bombing in Victoria back in the 70s. Here is a Report

The benefit of large aircraft water bombing are fairly marginal with large risks.

Where they are of benefit are exactly where the Blancolirio Juan Browne YouTuber criticised them for operating - in remote inaccessible locations.

Indeed and is the only way of actively firefighting in this sort of region.

 

[jb747]

I hasten to add that I'm not a pilot; I would like to hear comments from the pilots on the forum about his criticism.

Yes, there’s substantial risk to this sort of flying, and there will be accidents. On the other hand, it’s a service that is purchased by our experts on firefighting, and they seem to consider it worthwhile. I’d expect that the risks taken by these crews are an order of magnitude less than experienced by the fire crews on the ground.

 

[RooFlyer]

and the landscape and broadly heathland vegetation in Fitzgerald River NP (ie. not towering eucalypt forest). The park is not really that isolated, but its interior is rather inaccessible by land because there are few tracks.

The news commentary and vision tonight seem to indicate that the terrain is very rugged on a say 10 meter scale. Lots of gullies in the bedrock and big boulders, making ground access ( iE for ground firefighters) very difficult. Would that be right?

 

[Quickstatus]

Lots of gullies in the bedrock and big boulders, making ground access

Most of the built tracks are 2WD accessible
Other than that it is pristine wilderness with UNESCO classification
Dont know about the actual terrain but several rivers lead to the coast.

 

[tgh]

Whatever comes from the investigation.. it seems almost eerie that they could ditch on a gravel track and just walk away

 

[RooFlyer]

Whatever comes from the investigation.. it seems almost eerie that they could ditch on a gravel track and just walk away

I'll say! The vision in the news tonight seems to show the front of the aircraft, (say at least from say row five and forward, if it was operated as a passenger craft) almost untouched as the fire took hold.



Another shot, bit earlier



Edit: see JohnM's post earlier

 

[Quickstatus]

front of the aircraft

I suppose its the way it is because the fuel is in the wings and the way the wind is blowing?.

Did the pilots jump out through the flight deck side windows?

 

[RooFlyer]

I suppose its the way it is because the fuel is in the wings and the way the wind is blowing?.

Did the pilots jump out through the flight deck side windows?

I was more meaning that it wasn’t crunched or bashed up, but I’m sure in detail there were a few dents and scratches. Probably would’ve buffed out except for the issue behind.

 

[JohnM]

The news commentary and vision tonight seem to indicate that the terrain is very rugged on a say 10 meter scale. Lots of gullies in the bedrock and big boulders, making ground access ( iE for ground firefighters) very difficult. Would that be right?

That is the case near the coast and what makes it so physically (in addition to its spectacular and unique biology) attractive in that part of the park.

However, once up and inland a little way, it opens out into sandy (nb. not gravel) open heathland. The picture here, which is roughly in the area of the crash, gives the idea:

Sepulcralis Hill | Fitzgerald River National Park

A hiking guide to the 500m trail to the lookout on top of Sepulcralis Hill providing some views to East Mount Barren, the Mid Barrens and the Eyre Range.

www.thelifeofpy.com

Also, if you look at the picture in my earlier post (#14) - which I just see you have got, plus one even closer-up, you can see the white sand of the track, the flat terrain and the low, bushy heath vegetation. I would hazard a guess that circumstances could not have been much better for doing a CFIT - but I obviously defer to @jb747 on that.

Also scope here: Home - Emergency WA Warnings & Incidents

 

[oz_mark]

Indeed and is the only way of actively firefighting in this sort of region.

I think his question on why they are fighting the fire is relevant. In the past, they used to just let them burn.

 

[jrfsp]

I think his question on why they are fighting the fire is relevant. In the past, they used to just let them burn.

Fire is continuing to travel and is currently threatening lives and homes, the idea is to put the fire out before it gets out of control.
What’s the point of having the LATs if you don’t use them? After black Saturday the general response changed to fight fires as hard and fast as possible.

 

[Daver6]

The ABC article suggests the aircraft clipped the top of a ridge. This picture looks like it actually was travelling perpendicular to the track (based on the damage done ot the scrub land) and happened to just come to a stop on it.



As they say, any landing you walk away from is a good one.

 

[RooFlyer]

This picture looks like it actually was travelling perpendicular to the track (based on the damage done ot the scrub land) and happened to just come to a stop on it.

And as JohnM noted, a nice sandy substrate.

 

[JohnM]

Movie vision here gives a good indication of terrain, vegetation, the drop of their load(s) on the NW edge of the fire front being pushed by the prevailing SE wind:

Planes grounded as investigation starts on firebomber crash

Pilots are “lucky to be alive” following a “miraculous” escape from their Boeing 737 firebomber crashing in Western Australia’s south on Monday.

www.watoday.com.au

 

[Quickstatus]

This picture

Skid marks suggest they were able to bring the aircraft down very gently

 

[jb747]

Skid marks suggest they were able to bring the aircraft down very gently

I don’t think they did anything of the sort. They just happened to accidentally run into the ground. The outcome was purely luck.

 

[JohnM]

Yes, there’s substantial risk to this sort of flying, and there will be accidents. On the other hand, it’s a service that is purchased by our experts on firefighting, and they seem to consider it worthwhile. I’d expect that the risks taken by these crews are an order of magnitude less than experienced by the fire crews on the ground.

I don’t think they did anything of the sort. They just happened to accidentally run into the ground. The outcome was purely luck.

I think that we have some interesting underlying things, unrelated to the physics of keeping that bird in the air, at play in this whole incident.

A lot of people seem to have made the assumption that they were dealing with, for want of a better term, a 'classic' SE Australian-type wildfire (ie. a massive leaping-ahead crown fire in a 50-70m tall E. regnans forest, with its associated 'firestorm' (this assumption comes through in some of the Blancolirio channel's comments).

That was not the case - it was a fire in heathland vegetation - albeit highly flammable and maybe with a (relatively) high fuel load. And the weather was not a screaming windstorm. It could not possibly be a raging crown fire shooting embers kilometres ahead a la Black Saturday. That is not to say the fire was not causing significant atmospheric disturbance affecting aviation.

But that heathland vegetation is a World Heritage-listed biodiversity hotspot. Take it from me, the flora is stunning. But it has also evolved in a fire-regime - as has most of Australia's natural vegetation. Fire (actually very often the smoke) is a critical requirement for successful seed germination and regeneration.

It is at this point that the clash between biology and the needs of society to stop fire messing with us comes into conflict. It also potentially sets biological 'experts' who want nature to 'work' both with and against fire and emergency 'experts' whose raison d'etre is 'stopping fires'.

On one hand, and given that it's an uninhabited area, one could 'let it rip' - but when the 'biologically pristine' area is limited to a small fraction of its original size, and may be (temporarily) wiped out in one hit, rather than in mosaic, is that acceptable?

Hence the 'controlled burn' strategy that's been long-established in WA (since the 1961 Dwellingup bushfire catastrophe) - but which struggles to keep up with the need. It's an attempt to create a fuel-load mosaic where bushfires can not easily initiate or burn themselves out, yet maintain regenerative function.

On the face of it, to some people sending in a large jet aircraft to 'bomb' a heathland fire would seem like overkill. But it's a 'bushfire', so to others, it must be bombed into submission before it consumes our (in this case distant) properties. (On the 'fatal' run they were 'bombing' the perimeter progressing into the park - away from the closest human habitation).

The fire control people need to be seen to be doing something - and maybe, these days, the more 'high-tech', the better...

But the context is important and I think a lot of that has been lost as this aviation 'firestorm', as it were, has spread around the world.

It's a controversial issue and long has been so in the SW of WA (the far inland regions like the Kimberley, Goldfields and Pilbara are a whole different story). Like many issues in society, there is no simple answer and I certainly don't presume to have one.

So, back to the crash. I just can't imagine that their luck would have been as high had they been tackling a massive crown fire in towering eucalypt forest in hilly and rocky terrain instead of a comparatively moderate fire in heathland on flat and sandy terrain.