h a l f b a k e r yThis would work fine, except in terms of success.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
We've got lots of good fixed-wing aircraft, like the CL-415, or CL-215 designed to scoop water directly from lakes. However, some areas lack the lakes big enough. But here's a solution: build the lakes right where a fire has burned! The CLs need 410 meters of distance on water, so a circular lake
1000 meters in diameter would be big enough to service such a plane with ease.
Original filling of the lake and keeping enough water in it will be a hassle, but the shortened trips required to refill the firefighting planes will makes the costs worthwhile.
In most cases, a well can be drilled to get the water. Low cost windbreaks can make sure not much water evaporates while the lake is filling, among other measures.
The lake will need to be at least 2 meters deep to be useful, but it might pay off to dig it to 10 meters depth average, or more. The depth should be enough for a thermocline that will slow evaporation, so that the lake can last.
Firefighting bombs
Firefighting_20bombs
[bungston, Feb 09 2006]
[link]
|
| |
"Put it right where the fire was? What, here? On this steep hillside?" |
|
| |
The lake would be a little over 180 acres in size. |
|
| |
In a california wildfire, where 300,000 acres have burned, finding a place to put a lake thatisn't a steep hillside will be a piece of cake. |
|
| |
This won't be cost effective in some habitats, but it california, wildfire damage was 2.5 billion one year, and the biome in question, chaparral, does not require fires. |
|
| |
longshot, the type of bomb you are talking about is a fuel-air explosive, or sometime similiar. You can't really direct the blast on those. |
|
| |
The idea of making large bodies of water is Widely Known To Exist [Marked-for-deletion]. Choosing a specific location to put them does not an invention make. |
|
| |
What if large bombs dropped from a great height were used to make the lake? And fight the fire! |
|
| |
[longshot] - see linked idea re firefighting bombs. It seems like a good idea to me too. |
|
| |
[bungston] Fight fire with fire! |
|
| |
The invention is not lakes itself, but the system to automatically put lakes in after fires. That is what does not exist, much to the detriment of some fire-prone areas. |
|
| |
Better still, build lakes *before* the fire, thus removing all flammable material from the getgo. |
|
| |
Hard to convince people to clear away a bunch of plants. Easier to convince them to clear away some charred remains. |
|
| |
I wasn't actually serious, [Mad] ;)
Logically, that'd result in us all living ankle-deep in water. |
|
| |
What? You'd need these lake for wildfires, not anwereh near where people live, silly. and I'm thinking of, say, one 180 acres or so lake to service a wild area 20 miles in radius... over 700,000 acres. |
|
| |