Very happy to hear he got out, hope he’s okay. And a huge thanks to our firefighters, that’s one hard, hot job.

They are air tankers, not water bombers.

Ditto grizzly

Drops water on fires how is that not a water bomber?

“Air tanker” is aa US designation. “Water bomber” is Canadian. Same poop different pile.

Having worked in the business for a number of years, go ask those that run them what they are called. Educate yourself.

I did. You’re wrong as usual. But whatever dragon. Have a good night.

Air tanker? Water bomber? Who cares if one person calls it one thing and a different person calls it something else?

A plane crashed on the water! The pilot seems to be ok!

I think that most of us are able, without being educated in the technically correct terms, to ascertain from the story that the plane was of the type that is able to scoop water from a lake and then is able to drop the water from the air onto a fire.

airtractoreurope.com/aviones/ficha/general/1

A small sucker. Not one of those that need an airport to operate from.

As long as no one cares, I’ll call it a small sucker. Small is beautiful.

Small sucker or small scooper? It does have a 60 foot wingspan making it larger than an average house. BC has 4… well 3 of these planes under contract. Call it what you want, I put my vote in as not caring.

The Mars water bomber is coming out of retirement for a month starting this weekend. It does however cost us $8,400.00 more per hour than all the 4 802Fs combined. It can hold 27,000 litres but it has to land on the water to refill. Each 802F can only hold 3,100 litres but can also refill without landing at 1,700 water bodies in BC while the Mars is limited to 113 water bodies for refilling and cannot be used for dropping on steep terrain.

Where would the province be in regards to fighting fires if they had employed the most effective bomber for flat surfaces from the start of the season? Further ahead than they would be today as decisions based upon fiscal responsibility cost more on the long run. The fire west of PG would have been out in days without threatening property had the bomber been used then. Easy to sit back an cite numbers, the reality is the government has mismanaged the forests, failed to deal with deadfall or clear brush from interface regions, this has place many communities in danger of fires.

But minion2014, who care about the forests, if LNG is BC’s future?

Water Bomber for as long as I can remember. Air tanker would imply refueling.

Slinky the mars was used in the mountainous terrain of the coast quite successively for fifty years.

Lake restriction is not an issue, assigned to fires that work for it.

Isn’t the base at the airport called the Air Tanker Base or Air Tanker Operations ? Don’t recall it ever being referred to as a Water Bomber Base or Water Bomber station.

How some can make a mountain out of a mole hill. Too much time on your hands if this is going to be the debate of the day!

Well put Hart Guy

I had to say something before the thread turns to 50 comments about the Harper Government.

Ya they got tanks at the airport.

Ya, there is a tanker base at the airport. The road to get to it is, ironically, called Air Tanker Road.

Find it yet seamutt ? Its probably been there for over 30 years.

US calls them Airtankers not Air Tankers.

Seamutt according to the MOF they cannot be used for steep terrain, probably because you have to evacuate the firefighters from the area before you drop more than anything. And because it has to land, if a lake is close by the smaller 802F can come and go quite a few times before the Mars can land-fill-lift off and be more effective, hence why it has been sitting on Sproat Lake all this time. We took the boats out to where it was moored during a family reunion and it is quite impressive floating at the west end of Sproat, almost as impressive as the carvings in the rocks along the shore