Russian plane fighting wildfires crashes in Turkey

[PHXPhlyer]

Russian plane fighting wildfires crashes in Turkey, killing all 8 crew members on board

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/14/europe/r ... index.html

(CNN)A Russian aircraft deployed to Turkey to fight wildfires crashed on Saturday, killing all eight people on board, officials said.

The aircraft's five crew members were Russian and three Turkish nationals were also on board, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement on Saturday, according to state news agency TASS.
The Be-200 amphibious aircraft crashed as it was due to land near the southern city of Adana.
A commission from the Russian Defense Ministry has been sent to the crash site to establish the causes of the accident.
According to TASS, the plane was sent by Russia to Turkey on July 8 to help douse wildfires that have swept across the country in recent weeks.
Images of the crash site released by DHA Turkish News Agency showed charred wreckage littered across mountainous terrain with only the aircraft's tail apparently still intact.
The governor of the southern Kahramanmaras district in Turkey, Ömer Faruk Coşkun, told Turkish state news agency Anadolu: "This is still very new right now. We sent a large number of teams to the area where the plane crashed."
Turkey is one of many countries around the Mediterranean Sea that has battled devastating wildfires as the region experiences a relentless heat wave. At least eight people have been killed in the fires in Turkey, while more than 30 have died in floods in the northern provinces near the Black Sea in recent days.
Scientists say the climate crisis is make heat waves, fires and flooding more regular and intense.

PP

[tango15]

A subject close to my heart. I have had dealings with Beriev and the people who do these flights. Everyone on these pages knows that they carry a high degree of risk, wherever they are undertaken. Aerial water (and retardant) dropping is still the most effective way to deal with these fires, but prevention is better than cure and I just wish the United Nations, instead of for example, worrying about the World Heritage status of Liverpool, would spend its time using its undoubted talents towards dealing with this problem from the roots, but it's not going to happen, because there's nothing in it for them.

[FD2]

I think that the United Nations has always been more of a talking shop and doesn't have any 'teeth' without the approval of its members. Often worthy causes will be vetoed because one country disagrees with another, so it's easier to come up with social 'initiatives' than take positive action over something worthy like perhaps an international fire fighting force. I wonder whether anything positive occurred in Liverpool due to its new 'status' to change anything permanently for ordinary Scousers.

[Rwy in Sight]

I am surprised that all countries talk about the need to have more fire-fighting capability yet they hesitate to launch the production of the new version of the Bombardier fire fighting aircraft the CL-515.

[tango15]

FD2 and RiS:

Agree with you totally on both counts. Ever since they filled the UN with NRs, it has become more of a talking shop than ever. Fwiw, I actually agree with the UN decision. Joe Anderson, the former mayor, known locally as Chippy T*ts, is largely responsible for this. As a Scouse mate of mine said recently, it they dug up Maggie Thatcher and put a red carnation on her, they'd vote for her. Ye reap what ye sow...

Most countries just won't spend the money. I spent a year trying to persuade the Portuguese to lease a couple of Be200s, which they had already successfully operated. The plan was to operate them in the northern hemisphere in our summer and then move them south for their summer, but no-one would bite. The usual problem of spares for Soviet/Russian aircraft would be solved by the fact that Airbus held a complete spares facility for the aircraft in Toulouse.

[Pontius Navigator]

All governments 'self insure'. As long as it is less expensive to do nothing, doing nothing is the preferred choice. People say 'why doesn't the Government do....'? but don't want to pay extra taxes for it.
Only people living on flood plains want Government to pay for flood defences. Do people in urban conurbations demand facilities to fight forest fires?

[Rwy in Sight]

I would because I wouldn't have to pay for large and nice uninsured houses built on forest

[llondel]

All governments 'self insure'. As long as it is less expensive to do nothing, doing nothing is the preferred choice. People say 'why doesn't the Government do....'? but don't want to pay extra taxes for it.
Only people living on flood plains want Government to pay for flood defences. Do people in urban conurbations demand facilities to fight forest fires?

Given a few recent incidents where such fires have reached suburban and urban areas, I think fire suppression is a reasonable priority even for those in cities.

[Pontius Navigator]

Ilondel indeed but the priority will be more accute when it comes to the matter of votes.

[FD2]

A slight diversion:

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-58248261

I think an international aerial fire service is such a good idea that it will never get off the ground. I'm not being facetious - governments will always take the path of least expenditure and the service would be like an insurance policy. Most governments will not pay the money required for adequate defence forces let alone the insurance cost for when the fires strike their people. No doubt 'lessons will be learned' in that event. Converted 747s dotted around the globe would be a start - there are plenty of them now, closely followed by redundant A380s.

[TheGreenGoblin]

A slight diversion:

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-58248261

I think an international aerial fire service is such a good idea that it will never get off the ground. I'm not being facetious - governments will always take the path of least expenditure and the service would be like an insurance policy. Most governments will not pay the money required for adequate defence forces let alone the insurance cost for when the fires strike their people. No doubt 'lessons will be learned' in that event. Converted 747s dotted around the globe would be a start - there are plenty of them now, closely followed by redundant A380s.

I think that your idea is an excellent one FD2, although I also concur with your cynicism about the shortsightness of governments. I suspect that the reality of a hotter earth and the concomittant weather extremes and fire risk, might force the powers that be in some regions to rethink their approach.