Page 10 of 31
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:55 pm
by treeny
i think due to the salt content in the river, they prefer to use fresh water (ie golf course lakes) At the kings park fire they werent allowed to drop salt water as its a botanical garden.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:14 pm
by Magnus
That's correct, one of the criteria, other than protection of assets, considered when using arial firefighting is the potential for regeneration of the vegetation.
Many indigenous Australian plants reproductive processes are enhanced by the action of fire, salt water is detrimental to this process.
Also if salt water is used on native bushland, the environment can be damaged and many plants may die or be significantly weakened due to the salinity.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:44 pm
by TrainFreak
"If I remember correctly", when the Fire King was here, it was only able to use fresh water due to the concerns of salt water getting into the engine and the only time it was able to use salt water was when either assets or human lives are at stack. But the AS350 B3 "was" allowed to use the Swan River Water as a supply due to the positioning of the engines (or something to do with that).
I think that if the fire is under control or there’s is no danger posing at the time, both AS350 B3's and S-61's will go to a fresh water supply to remove that slight risk of damaging the engines (with salt). Another reason why could be if the river isn’t wide enough to fit both, boating traffic and helitacs (+ extra area so blades are not a concern).
Please don’t quote me on the above info as some of it is a least 3 years old now and I could of forgotten bits.
But i know in the past they AS350 B3's have gathered water the from the swan river, including Australia Day Skyworks and the previous water bombing media day. And on the media day "i think" the Fire King gathered water from a collar tank instead of the river.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:49 pm
by yorky
Also just to note around 3-4 years ago I think for the Australia Day Skyworks there was a show of ~3 Helitak's doing several Swan River water pickup and dumps.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:27 am
by Helitak_670
They can pick upsalt water, not the prefered option. after they pIck up the salt water and return to perth airport they flush out the tanks etc with fresh water. Maintenance wise you need to carry out a compressor wash to take the salt off the blades.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:02 pm
by written_ficton
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:56 am
by TrainFreak
Two helitacs just took off from the airport does anyone know where they're heading
i think they were 670 & 671, but im not 100% sure
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:05 am
by kwn
TrainFreak wrote:Two helitacs just took off from the airport does anyone know where they're heading
i think they were 670 & 671, but im not 100% sure
both returned to airport 1139
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:36 pm
by TrainFreak
Thanks kwn
The helitacs were 670 & 669
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:33 am
by TrainFreak
Just a quick question
I was wondering which is the correct term to call Western Australia's fire fighting helicopters?
I know people call them some of the following?
helitac (Media use this one, incl. ch7 and The West Australian)
helitack
helitak
helibomber
helitanker
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:56 am
by treeny
Im pretty sure its Helitak, altho i could be wrong.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:14 am
by kylep
With regard to salt water, from NAFC.org.au...
Can you use sea-water?
Most firefighting aircraft are capable of dropping either salt or fresh water. However, for helicopters that are equipped with bellytanks that use hover-fill pumps, or with buckets on ‘short’ lines, we do tend to prefer to use fresh water if possible. This is to avoid the chance of ingesting salt into the turbine engines, and into some particular parts of the airframe that are susceptible to corrosion – all of which requires substantial extra maintenance at the end of the day. However, in an emergency, any suitable water supply will be used, including sea water, and the extra maintenance will be undertaken. For helicopters equipped with sea-snorkels (allowing the helicopter to maintain forward speed when filling) and buckets on long lines (greater than 100 feet) the use of sea water does not cause such maintenance issues. All Type 1 (large) helicopters contracted for firefighting in Australia have this equipment as standard and routinely use salt water. There may also be situations where the Air Attack Supervisor is conscious of the possible environmental effect of a large amount of salt water (for example on sensitive vegetation or in domestic water supply areas) and may require the pilot to use fresh water if available. This would only be the case in very limited circumstances. Again, in an emergency any suitable water supply will be used.
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:34 am
by Nick
Trainfreak,
http://www.fesa.wa.gov.au/internet/defa ... tentID=561
The FESA website has them listed as Helitac.
Nick
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 11:37 am
by kylep
I'm pretty sure in my time in FRS they were referred to as Helitacs.
Online research shows most Australian agencies, including NAFC, AFAC, RFS, CFS, TFS,etc reference 'Helitack'. This is certainly the most prevalent version of the name.
More confusion however when you read one of the NAFC/AFAC reports on Aerial Firefighting best practice where in the one report, both 'Helitack' and 'Helitak' are used. Further, most documentation online actually refers to 'Helicopters', rather than the callsigns.
Wikipedia entries show first use of the term in California in the 50's as Helitack, and this version appears through various documents and webpages of American Firefighting authorities.
I'd conclude that the most correct version of the name is Helitack.
.. Now to remember this myself!
Re: Helitak Thread
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 2:46 pm
by Fastlane
kylep wrote:I'd conclude that the most correct version of the name is Helitack.
.. Now to remember this myself!
The question was in relation to WA, not the world or Australia
All of the circulars etc I've seen, use "Helitac".
