Captain Canada's Water Bomber Build

[Gary]

Water Bomber Group Build

Ok, here goes. This one ain't easy baby.

Deadline, the beginning of fire season, 2007, or June 1/07
Concept, design and build a reasonably real solution to water bombing needs, with a pinch of wiffy dust. (kinda like pixy dust, but much better)

Rules: Ok, this one needs rules. As the great Wooksta says, good wiff must be somewhat believable. So bearing that in mind, the rules basically go that what ever you develop must be plausible. For instance, the 747 we discussed works for a few reasons, one it isn't gonna get low, and it doesn't top out its max load weight, so it's safely within its flight envelope. It also keeps the load very near the COG so when she dumps, no severe flight control issues. An F-18 would use wing tanks filled with retardant or if possible to modify it with a float or flying hull, even cooler, but watch out for water ingestion in those engines.
Whatever you choose to build you must calculate the load factors, cycle times, delivery methods and if possible cost per aircraft and gallon delivered to fire. No restrictions on aircraft type other than a ready supply of suitable airframes being available and that this is a 2007 and beyond solution, Vintage aircraft like Avengers, while still in use in places aren't readily available, and as such are eliminated. A-10's are much more available.

Loads are to be based on fire retardant weighing 15 pounds per gallon. Cycle times will be based on the following, float planes will have suitable bodies of water 25 miles from the fire but will need to refuel at their land base which will be 200 miles from the fire. Land plane base is also 200 miles from the fire. So the question is, do you use a big land plane and stagger the load out, or go with an amphibian and go with smaller loads at higher cycle rates.  

If there is general agreement, I will provide everyone who wants to compete a set of standard decals and I will set up a sample colour scheme. You will simply need to tell me the dimensions of the basic elements (a 3 cm wide fin log, the company name 16 cm long etc) by March 15 and I will print and distribute them with your name as the pilot. Each entry naturally will get some spares as these homemade decals are kinda wonky. As this idea for a group build came from Captain Canada then I think the Aerial Attack company should be called Pomerleau Phorest Protection Services Inc.

And Prizes.... Mmmmmmm prizes.
Two categories. Number one, the vote system we have become used to. I like that!
Number two, the practical solution prize, who ever bangs out a set of figures that really works well and their idea has the most merit, and we'll use some knowledgeable guys here to decide, they win.

Number one category:
First place wins an Academy PBY 5 Catalina and I know I can find a water bomber book to go with it.
Second Prize, a super soaker, naturally and a 1/300 scale Hobbycraft 747
Third prize, a water balloon kit and an Airfix Avenger or similar

Number two Category:
First place wins a Heller CL-415 (or 215, whichever I can get) and the same water bomber book.
Second Prize, a super soaker, naturally and a 1/300 scale Hobbycraft 747
Third prize, a water balloon kit and an Airfix Avenger or similar

So, anyone wanna play with matches?

[anthonyp]

Whatever you choose to build you must calculate the load factors, cycle times, delivery methods and if possible cost per aircraft and gallon delivered to fire.

You're kidding, right?

[Ollie]

Nope.

[Gary]

Whatever you choose to build you must calculate the load factors, cycle times, delivery methods and if possible cost per aircraft and gallon delivered to fire.

You're kidding, right?

Not at all.
It isn't that hard to figure out really.

For instance, lets take the A-10 example. Strictly using the airframe with minor modifications to allow retardent to be dropped. Ditch the gun and ammo and you've dropped the aircraft weight approx. 5000 lbs.

What can an A-10 carry, war load exceeds 16,000 lbs with the gun. So you have about 21,000 lbs to play with. Let's be safe and resonable and assume that you'll need a bit more fuel for loiter time, so you retardent load could equal 18,000 lbs. That about 15% less than the specified load ability here, safely inside the margins.

Divide the load by retardent weight, 15 lbs per gallon, and you get 1200 gallons of red goo in an internal and perhaps 4 specialized drop tank style containers. Each container perhaps can be made to drop either the total load or 1/2 load, but must always drain two tanks at a time to maintain trim. So with the internal tank plus the drops you have a total of 5 possible drops or one big one.

A-10 is land based, so you have to fly 200 miles back to the base to refuel and reload. How long to fly bact to base and return to the fire? At a reasonable hurry speed of say 300 mph (lots of dangly drag inducing stuff here) the return time would be approx 1 1/3 hrs, not including loading time. Lets assume hot loading and hot fueling, tack 20 minutes on. So approx every 1 hour 40 minutes this one A-10 can be on station delivering retardent.  So if your attack group had, say three, then the fire could be very effectively kicked in the arce.

Flight profile? Down and dirty baby, where the Hawg was ment to be. She'd be down in every burning valley and crevis available.

The big woopie here is the cost factors. How much would the USAF charge to depart with the Hawgs, per unit price. What is the fuel consumption rate? What would it be to maintain the beasty. Those are all sorta weird factors that could only be estimated at best, but by no means required.

How do you apply this to an airliner or a modern floatplane? Look at the difference between the all up weight and the empty weight. You may have to fudge the numbers a tad to sort out the fuel weights verses the load weights, but so long as it's reasonably, cool. As the question here and there about fuel weights and such. The data is available and we have some of the brightest guys around for info like that.

Lastly, you don't need to submit numbers if you don't want to compete in the second category. It's kinda like writing a back story. Some guys don't do that but it sure as heck doesn't stop them from creating cool plastic that tells a story on it's own.  

[Ollie]

Gary said you didn't had to submit any numbers, it's optional...

 

[Gary]

Nice response from the guy who says a wiff still has to be believable.

Don't do the numbers then, just do the model and let it rest in the first category. That's why there are two catagory prizes. This ain't a JMN contest, it's taking the seed of an idea and seeing if it can be made to be believable.

And if you don't want to play, fine. Say no thanks. Just don't crap on it and destroy the fun others might find in rising to the challange.  

[Scooterman]

Like I said in the other thread.........



IN!!!!

[anthonyp]

Lastly, you don't need to submit numbers if you don't want to compete in the second category. It's kinda like writing a back story. Some guys don't do that but it sure as heck doesn't stop them from creating cool plastic that tells a story on it's own.

Ah, ok, wasn't sure what the squiggly lines on the screen were trying to tell me this morning, or if my pre-coffee adled brain was missing something.  As long as it's optional, and I can still participate without having to use the part of my brain I shut down when I build (other than "1...2...3...4!  I have 4 Sparrow Missiles!  Yay!  Me can add!"), I'm more likely to take part.

   

[Shasper]

Question concerning the *Vintage aircraft* rule, what if I want to do a variation of the Spruce Goose, Would that count or not?


Shas B)

[philp]

SC, where are you?
I need that profile now because I got a group build to do it for.

[Runway ? ...]

Mmm.. Thinks..  No Vulcan.
Mil26 - real. Mil6 - real. Mil10, Airbus summat, B52.   Pencil me in !

[The Rat]

Whatever you choose to build you must calculate the load factors, cycle times, delivery methods and if possible cost per aircraft and gallon delivered to fire.

No sweat. Schweizer 2-32, student and instructor with too much coffee in their systems, and a pilot relief tube each.

Been there, done that.  ^_^  

[lancer]

Whatever you choose to build you must calculate the load factors, cycle times, delivery methods and if possible cost per aircraft and gallon delivered to fire.

No sweat. Schweizer 2-32, student and instructor with too much coffee in their systems, and a pilot relief tube each.

Been there, done that.  ^_^

My screen and keyboard are now covered in tea thanks to you....Bloody hilarious though Mr. snake food...        

[lancer]

Must say that this GB sounds like a real brain cells exercise, as well as fun sounding. Count me in.

[Gary]

Question concerning the *Vintage aircraft* rule, what if I want to do a variation of the Spruce Goose, Would that count or not?


Shas B)

Well, being as the Goose was a one off and if you modernized it to fix all the performance problems, why couldn't it be put into production.

So you lock some honken big turboprops, al la Bear jobbies, and build her with aluminum...

Hmmmm, a Tu-95...

The noise alone would put the fire out.