San Diego Santa Ana conditions

[Barb-SAN]

It's a gorgeous fall morning in San Diego, with clear skies and visibility all the way to the mountains. It feels like what we call a "Santa Ana" condition here (low humidity too, around 25-30% right now, temps. in the low 70's). I remember that you (Capt.Hutch) said awhile ago that you weren't familiar with that weather phenomenon here in Southern California. So, I looked up the TAF for SAN this morning, and see that there is a windshear advisory in the forecast. We have a lowlevel onshore flow of air forecast from the WNW, NNW (and variable), and 1,500 and 2,000 feet up the wind shifts and comes from the NNE, ENE.

Any comments about how this forecast would affect your decisions for landings or takeoffs at SAN (if at all)? (one runway, 27/9). 27 is the runway that is used most of the time. (And this is an opportunity for you to explain to us how runways are named/numbered, too! ;))

Here's the link to SAN information on Airnav.com: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KSAN

[Barb-SAN]

Checking out Ontario, which is north of San Diego, and farther inland, you can see that the effect of the Santa Ana winds is stronger, and there aren't any winds from the west mentioned in the forecast. We sometimes have strong Santa Ana winds in San Diego, when strong surface east or northeast winds blow all the way to the coast (high fire danger then too).

Here's the link to ONT information on Airnav.com: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KONT

[Captain Hutch]

ha, ha, Barb-SAN, you are really educating me. I was watching the baseball game the other day and the announcer mentioned the Santa Ana winds--I of course thought of this thread.

First I'll give you my own guidelines and then how it would apply to SAN. I need to have my approach "stable" by 1000 feet agl. That means +10 knots, -5 knots of my planned approach speed, on the glide path, and with the airplane configured with landing gear down and landing flaps in the planned position. We don't land with more than a 10 knot tail wind, and I don't think there is limit on our headwind. Now, even if the ground winds called by tower are showing within those limits, if the black box in the airplane says I have a 20 knot tail wind at 1000 feet, which could be the component of a stronger quartering tail wind, then I will go around because I can't be confident that I can get the aircraft slowed safely for a safe landing. Our crosswind limit is 35 knots gust with a 29 knot limit steady state crosswind--on the ground. If it is higher than that above 1000 feet, and if I can keep the airplane aligned with the runway on my approach, then I don't worry about it and I continue to land. Basically, I keep checking myself as I come down the chute. If it looks good and I feel comfortable, then I continue to landing. If not, I go around.

The windshears at SAN weren't great enough to cause any problem I think from what I read on your forecast. One shouldn't be afraid of the word "windshear" before examining the change in speed and direction. I am not sure of the exact definition where they will start calling it a windshear, but it is probably around a 30 degree direction and 10 knot speed difference. A windshear with a 90 degree directional change and 20 knots or more at 1000 feet would cause me to take notice and reconsider my decision to make the approach: if that was the forecast I might begin the approach and see if actual conditions match the forecast, or if the "guy" ahead of me went around because of actual conditions, I would probably ask for a hold or delaying vectors and then maybe try the approach 15 or 20 minutes later.

I didn't see a windshear forecast at Ontario, though the winds looked a little high in the afternoon, so I would have to see what runways were available.

I hope I got all the answers right! :)

Hutch

[tusphotog]

(And this is an opportunity for you to explain to us how runways are named/numbered, too! ;))


Runways are numbered based on their magnetic heading--that is, runway 27 at SAN heads west--at a heading of 272.

At Los Angeles, the south runways are 25R/L and the north runways are 24R/24L. Both sets have a magnetic hdg of 249, so they rounded up on the south, and went with 24 on the north.

The runways will occasionally be renumbered, since magnetic north drifts each year.

By the way, last week LAS had a windshear alert. They were having winds from the south/SW at 35kts with gusts to 45-50kts. At 500AGL there was a windshear alert for WNW winds at 55-60kts. The approaches were a bit 'sporty.'

[Captain Hutch]

ah yes, Tusphotog, I missed that one. You pretty much covered it, thanks! :tiphat:

Hutch

[Barb-SAN]

At Los Angeles, the south runways are 25R/L and the north runways are 24R/24L. Both sets have a magnetic hdg of 249, so they rounded up on the south, and went with 24 on the north.


That's an interesting way to do it...less confusing too. Here's the diagram from AirNav.com.

http://66.226.83.248/aptdiag/w240/00943.gif

[Barb-SAN]

By the way, last week LAS had a windshear alert. They were having winds from the south/SW at 35kts with gusts to 45-50kts. At 500AGL there was a windshear alert for WNW winds at 55-60kts. The approaches were a bit 'sporty.'

I don't think we ever get winds quite that strong in SAN...it would be extremely rare if ever.

I'm wondering which runway they used for landing that day at LAS? (I'm guessing 25R). And if I was a really good student, I'd know how to figure out the crosswind component...but I'm not, so will cede that calculation to someone else, to determine if it was safe to land commercial jets with windshear and winds that high.;) (Must be, since Tusphotog is still here to tell us about it)! I'm thinking this would NOT be Cessna flying weather....

Did you check for the windshear alert AFTER you landed, Tusphotog? ;) Here's the sectional chart for LAS...any comments, Capt.Hutch? Here's the link on AirNav too for the airport diagram and information: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KLAS
Runways are: 7L/25R, 1R/19L

Additional comments about the airport from Airnav.com ...large numbers of birds and bats in the vicinity of the airport between sunset and sunrise!

Note, this Airport Diagram should be rotated 90 degrees to the right...but this is how it was on FlightAware.com, and I can't figure out how to get it rotated correctly (so north is at the top of the page). The orientation is correct on the sectional chart.).

http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/LAS/APD/AIRPORT+DIAGRAM/png/1

[Barb-SAN]

ha, ha, Barb-SAN, you are really educating me. I was watching the baseball game the other day and the announcer mentioned the Santa Ana winds--I of course thought of this thread.....


I didn't see a windshear forecast at Ontario, though the winds looked a little high in the afternoon, so I would have to see what runways were available.
I hope I got all the answers right! :)
Hutch

Well, the Santa Ana winds are a Southern California phenomenon....so maybe someday you will have a chance to experience them, if you ever fly out this way. Here's a link to an article in Wikipedia with more info. about them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Ana_wind

Sometimes they make people a little crazy too (and it's true about making your skin itch...at least mine does, and I just start feeling edgy and worried about fires if the wind really starts blowing hard)...

"Santa Ana winds in popular culture...“Those hot dry winds that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch. On nights like that every booze party ends in a fight. Meek little wives feel the edge of the carving knife and study their husbands' necks. Anything can happen.”
—Raymond Chandler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Chandler), "Red Wind"


No, there wasn't a windshear warning for Ontario. I merely included that to show that the E or NE winds can get much stronger further inland, and you don't see the effect of the onshore breeze from the ocean.

The runway for Ontario is 8L/26R, winds were gusting from the NE (50 degrees) at 46 MPH. O.K. to land on 8L? (for commercial jets, that is)

That day there was a high wind warning for our local mountains to the east of here...with winds up to 45 MPH and a warning to be careful driving high profile vehicles. There are times when the Santa Ana winds can be 70-80 MPH in the mountains, and they close the highways until it dies down.

Thanks, Capt. Hutch, for explaining how you pilots would do your approaches in that type of wind conditions. (I'm sure you got the answers right....I hope so...but I'm not the one to ask about that!)

[tusphotog]

I'm wondering which runway they used for landing that day at LAS? (I'm guessing 25R). And if I was a really good student, I'd know how to figure out the crosswind component...but I'm not, so will cede that calculation to someone else, to determine if it was safe to land commercial jets with windshear and winds that high.;) (Must be, since Tusphotog is still here to tell us about it)! I'm thinking this would NOT be Cessna flying weather....

Did you check for the windshear alert AFTER you landed, Tusphotog? ;) Here's the sectional chart for LAS...any comments, Capt.Hutch? Here's the link on AirNav too for the airport diagram and information:


I was scheduled to fly through LAS that day (around the time of the shear warnings) up to PDX for work, but some things changed at the last minute and I ended up staying behind in TUS. Lucky for me, since the weather here was picture perfect--mid 80s all weekend. It was 50 something and raining all week in PDX.

Anyway, I don't have the compass heading of the wind, so I can only guess, but I'd suspect they were using the 19s for arrivals and departures. If the wind is a SSW wind, say blowing from 195 or 200, that'd be more of a headwind (not quite a quartering headwind), so it seems to make sense to land on the 19s. I wouldn't think that pilots would plan to land into the shear direction, since it'd switch directions quite rapidly right around 500 AGL and that might result in an unstablized approach. I don't know if they'd plan to carry extra speed, reduced flap setting or what though. As for crosswinds, the max crosswind component for a 737 is 35kts, so if the wind speed was lower, I'm sure they went for 25 or 19. The real pilot would have to talk more about the technical aspect of landing a soda can with wind like that.

A few months back, I was on a trip through LAS and they had some nasty pressure gradient/wind storm in LAS. The pilot warned us before we left (after the shut the door :lol:) that it would be "extremely bumpy" when we landed. That got my attention because hearing "extreme" coming from a pilot isn't exactly what I want to hear. She couldn't have been more right. At about 4,000 feet to the ground, we were given one heck of a ride. Thankfully the wonderful people at Las Vegas Approach gave us an extended downwind, so we got to feel the bumps even longer! I got home that night and pulled up the NOAA site for LAS. Winds were blowing 45-50kts at about 260-270 degrees. Takeoffs at LAS are subject to crossing restrictions for arrivals, so we held on 19 for a good 15 minutes until we got an opening and they used every ounce of power the 737-700 had to muster. We were off the ground in 3,000 feet, and clean 30 seconds after liftoff. About 90 seconds later we were out of the bumps.

I normally check the TAFs the day before I fly so I can have a backup plan if delays might be present. It sure got my attention to see winds like that. :D For fun, I pulled up PIREPS at LAS and most gave Cont Mod turb/chop from 14,000 to the surface. A few light planes called out Mod-Severe and one note from ATC said the low level windshear was causing several go arounds.

[Barb-SAN]

By the way, last week LAS had a windshear alert. They were having winds from the south/SW at 35kts with gusts to 45-50kts. At 500AGL there was a windshear alert for WNW winds at 55-60kts. The approaches were a bit 'sporty.'

Thanks for your additional comments about LAS, tusphotog. What I was thinking when you posted this information, is that yes, runway 19 would give the plane more or less a headwind on the descent. BUT...what about those low-level high winds? That would then be about a direct cross-wind, right, (or even moving into a quartering tailwind) if landing on 19, that would exceed their safe limits? If they were landing on 25, they'd have wind from the left on descent, but not quite a direct crosswind, and then at low level, it would switch and come from the right, but also not a quite a direct crosswind.

I wouldn't think that pilots would plan to land into the shear direction, since it'd switch directions quite rapidly right around 500 AGL and that might result in an unstablized approach.

On the other hand, I see your point here...because the plane might be crabbing one direction, and then have to crab the other direction at the last minute. Landing on 19 though...they'd have a quartering tailwind at the last minute, and Capt.Hutch said he would go around if the tailwind component is 20 knots, and 55-60 kts. is significantly higher than that.

So, Capt. Hutch...what say you??? What would be your choice of runways? Or would you go around, or divert? Or just not fly into LAS? ha ha....

[tusphotog]

So, Capt. Hutch...what say you??? What would be your choice of runways? Or would you go around, or divert? Or just not fly into LAS? ha ha....

He's probably giddy because his particular airline doesn't fly 737s on the west coast :D

[Captain Hutch]

Man you guys are tough. With winds at 500 ft WNW 55-60 and surface winds SSW 35G45-50 I would go hold somewhere until they calmed down or divert. If I had to make an approach I would prefer runway 25R so that the winds switched from a right quartering head wind to a left quartering headwind as I descended for a landing. An approach to 19 would give me a too strong right quartering tailwind. I need the exact wind direction (mag heading) so that I know I will be inside the 35kt crosswind gust factor and steady state 29kt for landing on 25R. Off course without the winds at 500 ft landing on 19 would be the best. We have a wind chart that we can use in the cockpit but I spent so much time studying math and physics that I use the sin 30 deg = .5 and sin 60 deg = .866 (or .9 for me) and 45 deg will be .7 times the wind for the xwind and headwind.

Those winds are an incredibly high shift and not a gamble I would be willing to take!

Hutch :eek:

[tusphotog]

I need the exact wind direction (mag heading) so that I know I will be inside the 35kt crosswind gust factor and steady state 29kt for landing on 25R. Off course without the winds at 500 ft landing on 19 would be the best.

I was able to find the weather data for that day. The METARs don't make any mention of the shear direction/strength, so that makes me believe that it was non-existent or it wasn't a drastic shift like the TAFs had forecasted. http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KLAS/2007/10/5/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA&theprefset=SHOWMETAR&theprefvalue=1
Scroll down to 'Hourly Observations' and the METAR and decoded observations are there. Looks like the wind bounced around between 190 and 240 most of the day. If I can find the old TAF from that day, I'll post it.

Who said flying on the west coast wasn't fun? :tongue:

ps. What's a physicist?

...

an effervescent tumor.

[Barb-SAN]

Thanks, Capt. Hutch, for your input. I realize I misunderstood the forecast, thinking that the winds were from the WNW 55-60 at 500 ft. to the surface, rather than 500 ft. and above. Thanks for clarifying that...Details....(important ones, too....) ;)

I'm wondering...if the winds were truly as forecast...would the airport just be shut down so that individual pilots would not even be able to take a gamble with the landing?

[Barb-SAN]

We are having strong Santa Ana winds forecast for today and the next couple days...fires have already started...so the Santa Ana winds will be on the Natl. news. There's one fire already in Malibu...and we have a couple small ones (right now) in San Diego county. Here's the forecast at the airport...note that at this point we still have onshore winds near the surface...then a windshear at 2,000 ft., with winds from the NE. The drier air will be coming from the east (increasing fire danger). The runway at SAN is 27/9 (West/East orientation).

I imagine P.Mark remembers the Santa Ana winds all too well from his years living in S.California.

[Barb-SAN]

Of course the fires don't stay small for long when the winds are blowing. Checking SignOnSanDiego.com for news, http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20071021-1751-bn21harris4.html I also found a gallery of photos. http://photos.signonsandiego.com/gallery1.5/071019ramonafireThere's a rapidly growing fire near Ramona (which is where fire-fighting airplanes are based). I was surprised though that due to winds and poor visibility, the planes are grounded for now, and are not able to dump fire-retardant on the fire.

Capt. Hutch...do you know what kind of planes these are in the photos?

Reading some of the comments in the Sign On San Diego article, I came across this link to a Google Map that has the S.CA fires marked: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=102617558666443238993.00043d07052ecf586cd1a&ll=34.011689,-117.295532&spn=2.13093,4.438477&z=8&om=1

Stay safe, everyone around this part of the country! Hoping it doesn't get too crazy tomorrow...as we have a high wind warning in the forecast. :cry:

Wondering about California Jeff...as I believe his family lives in Ramona....:(

[tusphotog]

The planes in the photo 42 and 43 is a Grumman S2. I think the plane in photo 39 is a North American OV-10 or something like that. CDF uses a bunch of former military planes for their aerial attacks.

The reason CDF won't fly those planes right now is for two reasons: the smoke obscures trees and the canyons. Secondly, the fire creates very turbulent air currents (hot air rises), which make for very challenging flying. Combine the thermal winds, which can cause fire tornados (spectacular to see, scary as all hell when you're near them), and gusty winds and it's a recipe for disaster for firefighting planes. I think a few months ago, the CDF/CalFire DC-10 tanker was caught in a serious downdraft. It ended up striking several trees about 60 feet off the ground before being able to power out and return to Victorville.

Good luck to all of those out that way. Stay safe.

[Barb-SAN]

Good luck to all of those out that way. Stay safe.

Thanks, Tusphotog for the information and the good wishes. I decided to start "World Fest" a few days early, and flew out on SWA at 6:30AM this morning, escaping the choking smoke. (And am I ever grateful that I'm able to FLY out! :thumbsup:)

There was a spectacular, and ominous sunrise/smoke plume N. of San Diego visible as we departed. I'll post the photo eventually. I'm also sending my prayers to all still there, and one for my house, and all my neighbors and their houses that I hope will still be there when I return. I keep hearing the term "the perfect storm"....scary indeed.

[Barb-SAN]

This is a good link for more explanations of the Santa Ana winds, and there are also photos of the smoke plumes from the S.CA fires. Interesting radar images as well. http://www.weather.com/blog/weather/8_13908.html

[tusphotog]

Thanks, Tusphotog for the information and the good wishes. I decided to start "World Fest" a few days early, and flew out on SWA at 6:30AM this morning, escaping the choking smoke. (And am I ever grateful that I'm able to FLY out! :thumbsup:)

There was a spectacular, and ominous sunrise/smoke plume N. of San Diego visible as we departed. I'll post the photo eventually. I'm also sending my prayers to all still there, and one for my house, and all my neighbors and their houses that I hope will still be there when I return. I keep hearing the term "the perfect storm"....scary indeed.

If it gets really bad down there, I might stay in SAN this coming week to cover it. I fly tomorrow to LAS and I hear you can see the smoke flying into LAS, so who knows. It doesn't sound fun. Brings back memories of 2003(?).

By the way, the reason commercial planes can fly in the smoke/wind when the firefighting planes can't is simple. They use high thrust engines and aren't flying at 130kts through the smoke and fire line 250' up dropping water.

Good luck Barb and everyone else out there. Best defense is a 30' defensible space around the house with rock and other non-flammable stuff. That's a moot point though when there are crown fires and the sparks are being thrown a mile or more ahead of the fire line. Are you up in the Poway area or are you farther into the hills? It's spectacular to see up close, it really is. At the same time it's downright scary. I couldn't imagine having a home that's in the fire area.

[Barb-SAN]

.... Brings back memories of 2003(?).
Yes, I was there for those fires, and the smoke was very bad (and I seem to be quite sensitive to it too...somewhat asthmatic). That's why I decided to FLY far away from S.California on Monday morning....;) Did you cover those fires? (2003 Cedar Fire...and it was just about the same time of the year, in late Oct.)
Good luck Barb and everyone else out there. Best defense is a 30' defensible space around the house with rock and other non-flammable stuff. That's a moot point though when there are crown fires and the sparks are being thrown a mile or more ahead of the fire line. Are you up in the Poway area or are you farther into the hills?
Not in Poway, closer to downtown, but bordering "open space", canyon rim...so my worries about fires are not "imaginary"...:(...and I'd rather not wait until the last minute to go. I have tried to maintain that defensible space, but watching video of fires racing up hillsides...30 ft. is not much in the face of a fast moving wall of flames. The smoke situation can affect everyone who lives in the area, depending on which way the wind blows.

It's spectacular to see up close, it really is. At the same time it's downright scary. I couldn't imagine having a home that's in the fire area.

Well, fire potential is something that's always lurking in the back of my mind, along with the earthquake potential. I do have to thank this thread for making me even more aware than usual of weather conditions this month. I was "primed to flee" as soon as I saw the weather report on Sunday. Thanks to Capt. Hutch for inquiring about the Santa Ana winds.....;)



Well, good luck to you, Tusphotog, if you decide to spend the week there photographing. Hope you aren't too sensitive to smoke. I have the utmost admiration for photographers who can be professional and film disasters and remain a bit detached from it all, and continue to do their jobs. I saw Larry Himmel (long-time San Diego newscaster) this morning, I think on CNN, standing in front of his own burning house in Rancho Bernardo, and reporting on it..with just a hint of emotion in his voice. It's now up on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKGF2bbxQ6E

[tusphotog]

Did you cover those fires?

Well, good luck to you, Tusphotog, if you decide to spend the week there photographing. Hope you aren't too sensitive to smoke. I have the utmost admiration for photographers who can be professional and film disasters and remain a bit detached from it all, and continue to do their jobs. I saw Larry Himmel (long-time San Diego newscaster) this morning, I think on CNN, standing in front of his own burning house in Rancho Bernardo, and reporting on it..with just a hint of emotion in his voice. It's now up on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKGF2bbxQ6E

I wasn't there in 2003 shooting but flew through SAN and LAX a few times. Quite the site to see.

I've decided to wait and see how the situation changes this week. I just got in to Las Vegas a few minutes ago, and as we passed over PHX you could see a thin layer of smoke stretching for hundreds of miles. If I go, I'll probably end up living in my car for the week, which isn't exactly a prime living arrangement. I can't speak for others in the field, but personally, when covering situations like this, I tend to detach myself as much as possible from reality. I have the mindset that I have a job to do and being emotional doesn't help get the job done. That being said, you can't help but feel empathy when you see the tolls these things take on the people involved. If I go, I'll send you a message. I think we've taken this pretty far off topic.

As much as I love California, I'm really glad I don't live there anymore. I've been through enough earthquakes, fires, and all the other fun that California has to offer to last a lifetime.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming. :D

[Barb-SAN]

Well, thought I'd add a Santa Ana update to this thread. There's been a lot in the media the last week about the potential for another big Santa Ana wind event this week, and additional fire-fighting resources have been moved to S.CA "just in case". I've been paying more attention than usual to the weather forecasts, trying to figure out what is the most likely scenario. For anyone interested, there are a number of good articles here: http://www.accuweather.com/news-blogs.asp?blog=clark&date=2007-11-20_21:52&month=11

It looks like conditions won't be as severe as originally predicted. Whew..... (but I still spent several days doing yard cleanup and removing some of my landscaping near my house....making that "defensible space" :thumbsup:)

Also, as promised, here is an aerial photo from Oct. 22, about 7AM, leaving San Diego on SWA. On the left side of the photo is the large smoke plume from the "Witch" fire, being blown out over the ocean by the Santa Ana winds. At this point it had been burning for about 18 hours. This fire eventually burned close to 200,000 acres. :cry:
That's the sun coming up in the distance on the right...not a fire, and the glow on the horizon is also the sunrise...;). We are flying North out over the ocean, and you can see the coastline about half-way up the photo.

[Barb-SAN]

Here's another aerial photo of that big smoke plume from the "Witch" Fire. It was really a dramatic sight to see from the air. I felt overcome with gratitude that I was able to escape that smoke...and horrified to think of all the people down there under the cloud who would be breathing that air....not to mention trying to escape the fires.
Again, the pink glow in the upper left of the photo is the sunrise...not from the fires. Most of this photo shows the plume over the ocean, you can see a tiny bit of the coastline midway up the photo on the right.

[Barb-SAN]

I saw a photo of a converted DC-10 dropping fire retardant on the Malibu fire today (more Santa Ana winds), and was curious to know more about how that works. It was also used on one of the San Diego fires back in October. Here's a link with more information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanker_910


http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/COVER/071124/grid_071124_cvr_malibu_5p.grid-5x2.jpg Photo by Mark J. Terrill, AP

Any comments, Capt. Hutch?

[Captain Hutch]

wow that is one impressive sight!!! I don't know nuffink about putting out fires from airplanes, though. :eek:

Hutch

[Captain Hutch]

Those are great pictures but the way!

[Barb-SAN]

wow that is one impressive sight!!! I don't know nuffink about putting out fires from airplanes, though. :eek:

Hutch

I was reading somewhere in my Google search about this Tanker 910 that it flies low and slow to do the drops of retardant for more accuracy in hitting the target.

[Rebecca]

:shocked:Whoa! Those pics sure add substance to the news we get here about the San Diego fires. A few times that we've had range fires hereabouts, it looks to me like the effort with planes is kind of itty bitty compared to the scope of the fire. Not so with that DC-10!

[Barb-SAN]

This is taken from one of those accuweather.com articles: You can see how San Diego was really surrounded by fires.
The smoke plume in my photos is from the Witch fire, 18 hours after it started. My understanding is that things got considerably worse later that day. I have several friends with scary evacuation stories who live in that general area where the Witch fire was burning. My photos really do not do justice to the SIZE of that plume. That morning on my way to the airport from the airport long term parking lot, I talked to a guy on the bus who had just driven down 5 from Camp Pendleton. That was at 4AM, and he said the smoke was "choking" thick for much of the drive, then cleared up around La Jolla. The air was clear around the airport then, but still smelled quite smoky. :eek:

"Below is a picture taken on October 29, 2007, by a satellite from NASA.
http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/includes/columns/clark/2007/fires.jpg
This spectroradiometer (MODIS) picture was taken after most of the fires had died down quite a bit. It does show the extent of the fires on the landscape. Burned areas are brick red in color, while actively burning areas were outlined in red. Bright pink shows active flames while the green is unburned vegetation and grey areas are developed urban centers."

[tusphotog]

I was reading somewhere in my Google search about this Tanker 910 that it flies low and slow to do the drops of retardant for more accuracy in hitting the target.

This is almost what lead to a crash with 910 a few months back. They got caught in a downdraft created by the fire and ended up hitting some trees.

They returned to Victorville, trees and all. There are photos of it somewhere. I'll try and dig them up later.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI This isn't the D10, but a 747 flown by Evergreen. I had the chance to see this thing in action earlier this year and it was awesome. Video is ~7:00.

[Barb-SAN]

Cool video. The Homeland Security aspects hadn't occurred to me.

It flies 400-800 ft. off the ground, eh? Wonder how much margin of error that provides considering that fires can create their own weather....updrafts, gusts, fire tornadoes, etc.

[Barb-SAN]

Wonder what fighting fires looks like from the cockpit? This You-tube video also includes several clips of the DC-10 dropping orange fire retardant. It says it's from Summer 2006, S.California.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nRfXfjeKUuQ&feature=related

Here's a You-tube video of a DC-10 drop from the perspective of standing practically below the plane.:eek:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kW2s3XQ2njc&feature=related

Here's another, appropriately the narrator's first words are a cough from the smoke...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZbKXszNV7DM&feature=related

Here's one narrated by a spokeman for CalFire:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fPs6_KMB_L4&feature=related

News Crew got too close to this drop:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=OmlJtnC-acY&feature=related

[Barb-SAN]

O.K. Tusphotog...you really got me started looked up videos on You Tube now! I did a search on "Witch Fire" and found some dramatic ones...I'd sure rather be flying high over that plume of smoke than trying to escape it on the ground.

I believe the fires started around 9AM Sunday morning, so this one was taken after the fires had only been burning about 4 hours. SCARY!!

Edited 11/28/07 after watching this with my friend who evacuated from this fire...she said the Witch fire started at 12:35PM, so this video shows the fire only 30 minutes after it started. She said people were driving into the smoke trying to get to their homes. Dang...braver than I am....seems if the smoke didn't get you...the lack of visibility to drive might send you right off the road, not to mention you don't know what is waiting for you once inside the smoke cloud....
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9gWR5kOVKsU

I have a friend who had to evacuate from Ramona and said she is lucky to be alive...she was driving where there was fire on both sides of the road, and she said there were embers flying everywhere. I found a video of a news report filmed in Ramona...whew...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vs6El589_I&feature=related

[tusphotog]

O.K. Tusphotog...you really got me started looked up videos on You Tube now!

Glad I could help waste a day! :D

Just looked at the last video you posted of the photogs getting slurried and I'm still laughing. That's hilarious! The best part is that stuff doesn't come off!

[Barb-SAN]

It's that time of year in San Diego again...fire season. :(
A fire broke out to the east of San Diego this weekend, and it looks like they are hitting it HARD to knock it down while still small. Here's a link to some spectacular photos of the fire-fighting airplanes and helicopters at work. :thumbsup: http://www.flickr.com/photos/scott_burnham/sets/72157627681014887/

We all are SO grateful for the work that they do, especially after seeing the damage uncontrolled wild fires have caused here in the past. Fortunately rain is in the forecast for Wed....so that should help. http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/130967898.html
Another cool photo...possibly taken from another airplane or helicopter, given the angle. http://www.signonsandiego.com/photos/2011/oct/03/459039/