Not sure how to phrase it to get through to you. What's the magic number of rigs you envision to rush to the scene in minutes? 50, 100??? Haven't looked at their stations but I'll bet there weren't more than 10 pumpers within 15 miles. That's probably 20- 30 minutes of response time for the farthest one and then setup time. This fire grew faster than those first 10 and the next 30 could have stopped even if they'd had adequate water.
A fool would have run all those rigs to the top of the canyon straight into the fire.
To answer your question, the system was designed to provide sufficient water for normal firefighting needs. These were not normal firefighting conditions and no, you couldn't have designed a system to handle these conditions.
I'll say it again. You can't stop a wind driven fire here of "anywhere else in the world"!
Quote:
Originally Posted by fintstone
I don't understand how running out of water to fight a fire is not an issue in the fire not being contained or what having hundreds of reservoirs that did not provide water to the area that ran out (where the fire originated) makes a difference.
If "more rigs earlier would have only emptied the system earlier" as noted earlier, then why was the "system" not designed to provide sufficient water?
It seems to me that if a sufficient number of resources arrived quickly to fight the Palisades fire (including water which ran out quickly), I cannot see why it could not be extinguished before it became too large to fight. Even more so if not for the massive amount of dry scrub/growth allowed in the area.
If fires in CA are impossible to prevent or fight (unlike everywhere else in the world), I cannot imagine living there. If indeed that is actually the case, perhaps the state should not allow anyone to rebuild and depopulate what remains. It is just too dangerous. Make the state (or at least the LA metro area) a giant national park?
|