> Why did FEMA reject offers of aid from other countries?
4 September 2005, 16:22
The second last time the US rejected Russian
(aerial firefighting) help, FEMA had requested it
and the US Forest Service pulled rank, leaving the
Russians on a Moscow runway with two of the most
powerful firefighting aircraft in the world; IL-76
waterbombers.
That story is covered here by a Russian aviation
website:
Note that wildfire that time threatened to invade nuclear materiel.
Ironically, The Kursk tragedy followed hard on the heels
of the US Forest Service rejection and you know what kind of
flack Mr. Putin got on that one.
The US Forest Service has faced moderate wildfire conditions
this season (2/3 over), which is fortunate because the
bureaucrats insist that all potential disasters can be taken
care of by 1/3 the compliment of ’large air tankers.’
The legacy of the US Forest Service in large air tankers is covered here:
The second last time the US rejected Russian
(aerial firefighting) help, FEMA had requested it
and the US Forest Service pulled rank, leaving the
Russians on a Moscow runway with two of the most
powerful firefighting aircraft in the world; IL-76
waterbombers.
That story is covered here by a Russian aviation
website:
http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws002/los-alamos-01.htm
And here in an MSNBC reprint:
http://www.vadscorner.com/tooproud.html
Note that wildfire that time threatened to invade nuclear materiel.
Ironically, The Kursk tragedy followed hard on the heels
of the US Forest Service rejection and you know what kind of
flack Mr. Putin got on that one.
The US Forest Service has faced moderate wildfire conditions
this season (2/3 over), which is fortunate because the
bureaucrats insist that all potential disasters can be taken
care of by 1/3 the compliment of ’large air tankers.’
The legacy of the US Forest Service in large air tankers is covered here:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/artic...
A summary of this ongoing issue can be read, complete with links here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76