Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dsc
Yes, they get constant "new" regulation that they must always meet. They even offer to bring in plane for free use, as long as US pay for associate costs...as demonstration. Answer is: not safe enough to fly in US air.

Having travelled much, I explain to him how it is likely that US C-130 (tiny plane) maker bribe government office not to look at any...then he says...but how? Why? What of people's losses? Then I tell him: Do you really think that bureaocrats who sit in DC give damn about fires on other side of continenant...not their houses. He see's light after that.

Maybe they should go advertise in states affected, go to insurance company???

22 posted on 05/20/2004 5:40:08 AM PDT by RussianConservative (Xristos: the Light of the World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: RussianConservative

For a parallel argument in favor
of using the IL-76, consider how and
why the majestic Martin Mars waterbombers
were brought into service: http://www.vectorsite.net/avmars.html#m7

As well, consider the times and how and by whom
decisions were made in that case.

The Mars are North America's largest by
a long shot, but they are old, scoop only,
and use special fuel, not widely available.

The supertanker out of Oregon is claiming the
same big-volume liquids turf as the IL-76, but
takeoff-capable out of fewer runways than
the IL-76 if it is effective; not a given as this
tanker remains unproven.


24 posted on 05/20/2004 6:56:58 AM PDT by JohnA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson