Fire fighting aircraft

Fire fighting aircraftUnfortunately this time of year is bushfire season in Australia – particularly in the southern states, where humidity in the summer tends to be much lower than further north. Already there have been some devastating fires in South Australia and Victoria, fanned by hot and blustery winds. Australia is not the only country to suffer bushfires, which are also known as wildfires or forest fires in other parts of the world.

The use of aircraft to drop water and sometimes other retardants on fires is common, even essential, to help control big fires. However, typically the aircraft used are quite small, often ag-planes and helicopters otherwise used for crop spraying. The amount of water which can be delivered individually by these planes – while essential to fire control – is fairly limited. Also, strong wind conditions can ground many of these smaller aircraft.

Enter the leviathans of aerial fire-fighting.

Probably dimensionally the biggest of them all (the wingspan is greater even than a Boeing 747 ‘Jumbo’ jet) is the Canadian Martin Mars flying boat. Built in the 1940’s as a bomber, these aircraft have also been used for people and cargo transportation and have currently been adapted for use as water-bombers. They can carry almost 30,000 litres of water (around 6,000 gallons), which they can pick up in less than 30 seconds, skimming at 75 knots over a lake. This makes refilling and turnaround very fast. Here’s a link to a YouTube video about the Mars Water Bomber.

Truly the monster firefighting aircraft of them all must be the 747 Supertanker, which holds over 75,000 litres (20,000 gallons) of water. Flying at 500 knots, the 747 can get to fires very quickly and although it takes over half an hour to refill, it can hold near or over fire sites for many hours. It can drop part or all of its load, it can carry water or fire-retardant powder, and its overall speed and flexibility make it invaluable for fighting large fires.

Back in the mid-2000s, the DC-10 was the biggest of the aerial tankers, holding around 42,000 litres (11,000 gallons). This load of water or retardant was dropped using a computer-controlled system so that all or only quite small amounts could be dropped in a pre-programmed pattern. Interestingly, while the 747 and Mars aircraft carry their water inside the fuselage, the DC-10 has an external tank, bolted underneath the fuselage.

A bit further down the size scale is the amphibious Bombardier 415, a twin turbo prop aircraft which can carry 6,000 litres (about 1,500 gallons). The great strength of the Bombardier is its fast turnaround time – 12 seconds of skimming the lake to fill the tank – which enables it to deliver over 100,000 litres an hour. With a big wing and huge flaps, the aircraft is also extremely manoeuvrable which enables it to deliver retardant with pinpoint accuracy.

Last (for this post) but by no means least, is the famous (at least in Australia) ‘Elvis’ – the American-built Erickson S-64 Air-Crane helicopter. Elvis can carry around 9,500 litres  (2,500 gallons), which is a huge amount for any helicopter. However, Elvis is BIG, over 21 metres (70 feet) long and almost 10 metres (30 feet) tall. Elvis refills by hovering over a water supply or lake, making for fast turnarounds. However, the running costs of such a big helicopter are far greater than a fleet of smaller fixed wing aircraft, so Elvis is usually called on for fire fighting in urban-fringe areas, where fixed wing planes are difficult to operate.

Other aircraft operating on fire fighting duty in Australia this summer include: the C-130Q Hercules Air Tanker, an Avro RJ-85 Air Tanker and a Gulfstream Aero Commander AC690. You can find more information about these on the Australian Fire Aviation website.

Lets hope all these aircraft are not called into action very often this summer.

Reflection-free aerial photos

Photo adapterWhen taking photos from an aeroplane, if you want pin-sharp pictures suitable for magazines or blowing up to poster size or bigger, you have no choice but to shoot through an open window or door.

However, in many aircraft opening a door or window in flight is not permitted for safety reasons. You either have to remove the door before flight (very cold and draughty, specially in winter and/or at altitude) or live with the minor distortions of shooting through the perspex windows. Let’s face it, most photos we take from planes do not need to be ultra-sharp and capable of massive blow-ups, so shooting through the door transparency is probably not a major issue.

The doors on the Foxbat can be removed before (but not opened during) flight, so as a result, most people end up taking photos through the perspex which, in the main, is relatively distortion free. However, the real problem is not distortion but reflection – the doors on the Foxbat are convex and in bright weather are excellent reflectors of anything in the cabin. Light coloured shirts are a particular problem and bright yellow portable EPIRBs, light coloured caps and jeans have all been known to appear. It is these reflections which have rendered many of my potentially best photos unusable. Even flat windows can produce big, unwanted reflections.

Enter Mike Rudd and his Bunnings Aerospace plumbing grommet – technically a ‘dektite’ – for stopping photo reflections in Foxbat (or any other aeroplane) doors/windows. See picture above.

DektiteThe dektite comes in a range of shapes and designs but in essence is a bit like a big rubber conical sucker, with different diameter steps. The one in the picture on the left has a minimum diameter of about 25mm (roughly an inch to our imperial measure friends). Mike’s lens is 77mm in diameter, so he cut the rubber cone at that size and removed the square flaps. The cone is held on the lens with a (very hi-tech) plastic cable tie/zip tie.

When taking photos through the window, you just push the sucker up against the perspex and bingo! all reflections are eliminated. Being rubber, the cone is flexible, so you can move the camera around a fair bit to point in different directions without risking the reflections re-appearing.

Hastings from Westernport BayClick on this hi-res photo Mike took through the middle of a convex perspex door while using the dektite attached to his camera. The file is quite big – around 7Mb – so allow time for the download. The picture is a good example, contrasting the sky and dark colours of the bay, which could easily be swamped by reflections. The photo can be enlarged on screen, so you can see there are no reflections at all and any distortions due to the curved perspex are not intrusive.

Dektites come in a very wide variety of materials, shapes and sizes and, of course prices – which range from about $15 up to several hundred dollars or more for specialist applications and large sizes. They are available (as they say) from all good quality hardware and plumbing stores.

Unfortunately the dektites FAQ page I found offered no advice on uses with a camera, so you’re on your own. Happy reflection-free photos!

A different point of view

A different point of viewGordon Marshall of Sky Sports Flying School at White Gum Farm near York, Western Australia, sent me this link to a short Foxbat video on YouTube. As you’ll see, it is taken from a different point of view. Pilot is Andrew Cotterell – now on his second Foxbat – carrying out low level runway inspections at White Gum Farm.

This aircraft has flown several hundred hours – nice to see such a clean bottom!

FoxbatPilot blog – 2014 in review

2014 blog reportI have just received an annual statistics report for 2014 for the FoxbatPilot blog from WordPress. The blog started at the very end of March, so these figures are for the first 9 months.

Here’s a summary:

– the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed over 28,000 times in 2014. If it were a concert at the Opera House, that would be more than 10 sold-out performances.

– the busiest day was 15 June, with over 850 hits on ‘World Cup Celebration – Brazilian Style‘.

– other high scoring posts were: ‘Spotlight on training – Soar Aviation‘, ‘Foxbat sunset & night landing‘ and ‘Foxbat bird-strike‘.

– overall, there were 98 posts and 184 pictures uploaded to the blog.

– the most popular posting day is Tuesday – I may need to change this as I’m told Saturday is the most popular day to upload a post.

– there were blog visitors/subscribers from 104 countries around the world; Australian visitors are the most common with USA, New Zealand and UK close behind.

– the top three referring websites sites are Foxbat Australia, Facebook and Netvibes.

Thank you to everyone for joining my blog since it was launched on 30 March 2014. Your contributions and pictures have been very welcome. I’m looking forward to further developing and growing FoxbatPilot during 2015 – any comments about content, design and style are welcome.

Best wishes for 2015, Peter

PS- if you like it, please send a link to people you know who might be interested.

Measuring the LSA market

Rotax 912 ULS engineI found an interesting article in General Aviation News about the growth of the Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) market, both in the USA and worldwide. Click HERE to read the article.

Written by Dan Johnson (see his aviation blog at ByDanJohnson.com) it concludes that Rotax is by far the world’s biggest aviation engine manufacturer, with well over 50,000 four-stroke and over 120,000 two-stroke aircraft engines delivered to date. As a result, their annual engine sales can be used as a barometer for the recreational/LSA market as a whole, as other manufacturers like Lycoming and Continental are not really players in this market.

Dan makes some interesting remarks around the different proportions of LSA versus GA registrations in the USA in comparison with the rest of the world. In the USA, the GA-LSA ratio is 80-20, while in the rest of the world the ratio is reversed: 20-80 in favour of LSAs. He comments that this is probably because GA is relatively cheap in the USA and perceived to be very expensive elsewhere. (Tell me about it!). Although USA is the biggest single LSA market, nearly twice as many LSAs are actually sold outside the USA.

Other influencing factors in the USA may be that many aircraft service centres are unfamiliar with Rotax engines and some don’t even have access to the metric tools needed on the engine. Contrast that with Europe – and even Australia – where the Rotax is now a familiar engine.

Low and slow – 1

Lainey

Lainey’s first flight

I’m aiming for this to be the first in a series about simple aircraft. The series will be about easy flying in light aircraft, sometimes with nothing but an airspeed indicator, a slip ball, a tachometer, and an oil pressure gauge. These aircraft are all about a love of flying, pure and simple, without the need to get somewhere by a certain time and without the need for all the latest digital gadgets beloved by so many of us pilots.

I’m hoping it will re-kindle that wonder of getting off the ground, maybe just after dawn on a clear winter morning, or taking off into one of those warm, still summer evenings, when the long shadows give such an amazing sense of depth and contrast.

And where else to start but with the Piper J-3 Cub…

The J-3 Cub is thought by many to be the aircraft which personifies the essence of flying: near perfect control harmonisation, the third wheel at the back (where many old-timers say is the only place it should be) and complete simplicity of operation – no flaps and an ‘armstrong’ engine starter (there’s no electrical system). Although flown solo from the rear seat due to centre of gravity requirements, nevertheless, the J-3 Cub is an easy plane to fly…everything happens very slowly. If there is such a thing, the ‘typical’ J-3 is powered by an engine of only 65hp – but remember, this is a very light aircraft, even by today’s standards, and 65hp is plenty enough for all but the heaviest of crew on the hottest of days.

The very first Piper Cub, the J-2, had its origins in 1930 in the Taylor E-2 Cub, manufactured by Taylor Aircraft in Bradford, Pennsylvania. This aircraft, sponsored by William T. Piper, a local industrialist, was intended to be an inexpensive introduction to aviation but the Taylor company went bankrupt within a year and Piper bought the assets, although retaining C. Gilbert Taylor as president and also the company name. From a slow start, Taylor/Piper eventually built about 1,200 J-2 aircraft in the 1930s before a fire at the Bradford factory halted production.

J-3 panel

J-3 instrument panel simplicity

In 1938, the company was re-established as Piper Aircraft, the factory was relocated to Lock Haven, Pennsylvania and the J-3 was born. The J-3 featured, among other changes, a more integrated design of tail fin and a steerable tailwheel. It was originally powered by a 40hp engine and cost about $1,000 – for relevance, the average cost of a new car in USA was around $675 at that time. When the second world war broke out, the J-3 became the military trainer of choice and by the end of 1940, when the USA joined the war, over 3,000 J-3s had been built, powered by a number of different engines, designated by a suffix letter: J-3C (Continental), J-3L (Lycoming), J-3F (Franklin) and so on. At one point during the war, it is estimated that a J-3 was coming off the production line every 20 minutes!

During the late 1930s and 1940s around 20,000 J-3 Cubs were built, many designated as the military ‘L-4’ version. Since then, tens of thousands of Cub variants have been designed and built by Piper, most famously the Super Cub, with  powerful 150+hp engines, which give exhilarating performance, albeit at the expense of some of the endearing flight characteristics of the original J-3.

Sadly, in 1994, Piper went into liquidation and they stopped building the Cub. However, the aircraft lives on and various versions of it are now built in the USA both as certified GA aircraft and as Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) by Cubcrafters (in Yakima, Washington state), and American Legend Aircraft (in Sulphur Springs, Texas).

Here are some links to a few of my very favourite Cub videos (click on the names to connect):

The Classic Piper Cub – a short introduction to, and history of, the Piper Cub
Lainey’s first plane ride – a magical short video about a little girl’s first flight – in a J-3 Cub, of course. Reminds me of taking my own grandson, Ollie, for his first flight in my Foxbat about a year ago
The Yellow Piper – by Kristina Olsen, about learning to fly in a boyfriend’s Cub
Golden Wings – just the J-3 taking off, flying and landing
Dreams of Flying – an excerpt from the well-known video ‘One-Six Right’ featuring a J-3 Cub

And finally, if you are thinking of acquiring a J-3 Cub, there are hundreds in the USA. Have a look at Barnstormers.com aircraft for sale – hit the search button near the top of the home page, scroll down the menu on the left and click ‘Piper’ then scroll down and hit ‘J-3 Cub’. There’s usually a reasonable range, from basket cases to newly restored.

Pilot Flight Bags

AntoineMy very first flight bag – about 35 years ago – was a heavy, black rectangular box-like thing made of stiff board with (not very good) imitation leather covering, an opening top with flaps that folded over the single carrying handle, combination locks and a very basic single partition inside.

Occasionally I still see airline pilots with these types of bags but modern designs and materials technology have improved the quality and usability of flight bags out of all recognition compared with that old clunky box.

For the last few years I have been using a Brightline Bag, which is a modular system supposedly designed by pilots, for pilots. In many ways it’s great, in that it does contain most of my flying bits and pieces, except for a headset. However, in other respects, there are just too many zips and pockets. Every pocket has at least a couple – sometimes even three – different openings, each with its own pouch inside and although the zip tags are colour coded, it usually takes at least a couple of tries before I find what I’m looking for. You can only use one of the pocket-pouches at a time, so it would have been better to have just one opening per pocket and a lot less zips…

As the system is modular, you can add extra compartments by zipping them onto the ‘master’ bag – so, for example, you can add a 5″ deep compartment which could be used for an overnight change of shirt, undies and wash kit with toothbrush etc. In practice, this compartment is never quite big enough, you have to re-position the carry-handle to keep the whole bag in balance, and it is beginning to get a bit too bulky to fit comfortably in a small aeroplane. And having to carry a separate headset case can be irritating.

Now, just in time for for the holiday season – enter the Adventure Flight Bag Collection from Lightspeed – well-known manufacturers of pilot headsets. I have yet to see and handle one of these bags but from the reviews and comments I’ve seen, they look like a clear step forward, particularly for light sport and ultralight fliers. Each of the bags in the range is named after a famous aviation author. My personal favourite would be the Antoine, after Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, who wrote ‘Le Petit Prince’ (The Little Prince) which is the most widely read and translated book in the French language.

The bag is big enough to take a headset (Lightspeed of course!) and has a pocket at each end for a hand-held radio and a water bottle. There are pockets for a (now inevitable) iPad and much of the other paraphernalia we pilots love. My only complaint is that the very useful ‘organiser’ insert is an optional extra at $25; it should be included in the bag price of $179. Overall size of the bag is 30 cms wide by 25 cms tall by 14 cms deep, making it nice and compact for us light sport and recreational pilots.