1. Dennis on August 31, 2005 9:45 PM writes...

Consider Marty's experience in light of John Robb's comments at
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2005/08/citys_and_state.html.

And the grim reality of Robb's post at
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2005/08/runs_on_gasolin.html.

On what already seems like a downer of a day if you've watched the TV news, curl up with Robb's post at
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/12/legitimacy_101.html
as a nightcap.

2. Lin on September 1, 2005 12:52 AM writes...

Thanks for answering my first question in the handling of the misery in N.O. I heard something on CNN earlier today that there were 60 copters doing rescue missions in NO. FIFTY? That's it???

3. bill henderson on September 1, 2005 9:48 AM writes...

The Mississippi National Guard used to have a wing of those skycrane helicopters based in Meridian Mississippi, right next to the Interstate I would see them traveling to Tuscaloosa. They sure would be handy in New Orleans now.

4. Jim Minatel on September 1, 2005 10:06 AM writes...

I'd be glad to see every helicopter available diverted to rescue efforts. The breached levees will still be breached next week. The water isn't getting any higher. The people who need to be rescued will be dead in a few days if we don't get to them soon. Fixing the levees can wait.

5. Gentry LaMartin on September 1, 2005 11:24 AM writes...

While it is easy enough to say, "YES, sky cranes are the answer!", coordinating and applying them w/o wasting much needed resources is another story. Consider the amount of available landing space, fuel resources, bingo range, turn around time etc for smaller helicopters more suitable for the mission and environment then contrast that with the fuel guzzling, resource hungry sky cranes you suggest. While their helicopters are quite powerful, they are not suited for urban search and rescue. Furthermore they are far more powerful than what is needed. If there were material that can be dropped into the levees that required that sort of lifting power WE would use them. If there were enough resources and organizations on the ground for them to be used, they would be used. The fact is anything that large or heavy could possibly do more damage. WE could use the majority of fuel and space to support the sky crane aircraft and accomplish a fraction of what is being accomplished now. If WE followed your suggestion it would be great. WE could allow more people to die and cause more damage while soaking up fuel and space resources so that no one else could assist. GREAT! Or WE could use the smaller craft with better fuel/range ratios that are better suited for the job at hand. Am I being dramatic? Yes. As a person who is and has been a DAT volunteer in hurricanes and other disasters for the ARC, I can see some of the logistic nightmares faced. Does everyone want to do more? Yes. The fact is those types of resources are brought in much latter when there is more organization and resources on the ground to manage them. Those types of resources take time to implement. Right now the smaller more flexible and agile aircraft is what’s needed. They can operate in tighter areas faster with fewer resources less ground support and most important independently. They don't have to wait for a command and control structure to be used effectively and are easily coordinated. Far to many people sit back and say, "Well, we should do...." and do nothing. Even worse are the ones that say, "they should do this" and "they should do that". Who is "They"? The people sacrificing themselves to help? Instead of complaining do something. I am. I'm working day and night to get resources on the ground there, including myself. What are you doing?

6. phred on September 1, 2005 2:46 PM writes...

Gentry is right, but only to a point.
More and bigger aircraft are not always as easy to implement or as useful as we might think. They require crews, heli-bases, sufficient oversight to direct air traffic of all operations.

However, he overstates the point about the amount of time necessary to implement such resources and when one calls such resources. I haven't done hurricane relief, but I have worked on large project forest fires for 15 years (including managing helicopter operations and being IC on medium fires). I have also worked on floods and search and rescue for just as long. I see two ways in which the post is particularly apt. First, when a large-scale incident like this looks imminent (or even just likely), best practice is to begin mobilizing resources: navy rescue and hospital ships moving toward the area, Guard forces called to staging areas, helicopters moved to standby, helitac crews assembled, etc. Any organization that manages these things should know that. So, e.g., when a bad fire season is popping up, resources are readied, some standing crews are put together, some are even mobilized to staging areas. This doesn't seem to have happened at all in this case. I'm frankly baffled - whose responsibility is it to manage this stuff? Seriously, I don't know; my guess would be FEMA. Why were their pants around their ankles?

Second, and more to GL's point, when one doesn't know the full contours of the situation, you mobilize every resource available: and Sikorskies (the Skycrane helicopter) are one thing that certainly could be useful. You don't have to send them to NO to interfere with smaller, more easily manouevred helicopters. You stage them in Baton Rouge or on some farm within a couple hundred miles and have them ready to go. Sometimes they sit unused, sometimes they get in the game. But they WON'T get in the game unless the IC or the operations folks gets on the phone and gets them to a staging area. Finally, I'm not convinced that there isn't room to operate a bunch of large helicopters to help fill the breached levees. They can fly in over Lake Pontchartrain and avoid the other aircraft flying around the city. I've run 25 aircraft, ranging from Hughes 500s and Bell 212s up to Chinooks and Skycranes, all filling their buckets from the same small reservoir, 60 seconds or less apart, to drop on forest fires. It isn't obvious to me that the same kind of pattern wouldn't work dropping sandbags into the breach. Though I have no idea who fills the sandbags.

7. phred on September 1, 2005 3:43 PM writes...

one last thing. There is a shortage of food and water there - precisely the kind of thing that should have been anticipated and that WE (to use GL's phrasing) know how to deal with. Why aren't the stockpiles of humanitarian meals (basically lentil MREs) being droped by the thousands? You don't need a skycrane for that. And where are the blivets full of potable water? WE've done this before. The big helicopters are one thing, and may not be central. But the fact that they aren't staged is another piece of evidence that this is a clusterf**k. Another is the lack of food and water, another is the fact that there weren't evacuations before the storm hit. I'm embarrassed. Strike that. I'm ashamed and angry that this thing has been incompetently managed. Note: that is NOT an indictment of the people on the ground, who are doing the best they can under the circumstances. It is an indictment of whoever is responsible for planning, managing, and mitigating.

8. Paul on September 2, 2005 2:33 PM writes...

Staging aircraft in the way of the storm has to be one of the dumbest ideas I've heard in a while.
If the winds blows 140+ miles an hour, most aircraft will start flying by themselves, while the very few that wouldn't would be completely damaged.

If you've ever been to an airport after a storm like this, you'd realize that all aircrafts are gone (completely crushed, or they are in a safe place).

The sad fact is that it doesn't matter what kind of helo we use to fix the breach. We have to wait until the water stabilize before we start to really dump sand in there, otherwise it would just be washed away as the hole is too big.

We also can't get the water out of the city quickly because the levees would breach at other points. This is a problem that looks easy to fix, but it's not.

Having worked with dams before, the best way to fix this would be to dump telephone pole. Preferably the old kind make out of concrete. Once this wall is established, bring in river rock and dirt to fill this patch. This would be a temporary band-aid.

At this point you can start to clear the city of water. Make sure you have pumps there because water will still get in. It's easier to put it right here.

As the water level lowers in the city, you'll have to worry about the others levees breaking as the pressure on them is increased. Some of them will break which will slow the drying up process.

After this is done, the wall can be fixed permanently.

These small helos are just a pacifier given to the media. Imagine what they'd say if we said we can't do anything about it right now? The best nation in the world can't fix its own problem...

Big helo will get there, and the army has them. However they're not needed right now, and they won't be for a few more day. We're got to get a good plan in place, and then get the material needed to fill the crack. After that we'll worry about how to get them to the hole.

Those big helo you're speaking about might be great, but they might no fit the mission. If each telephone beams weight x, and the helo currently used can lift x, while these can lift 1.9x, we're better of with the current ones.

9. phred on September 2, 2005 2:48 PM writes...

did i say anything about staging in the storm path?

During a big fire season, e.g., you stage aircraft and crews in an area so that they are together and easily dedicated to an incident. This does not need to be in the immediate area. Distance to travel is not the biggest factor in hasty dispatching - organization is. Once we had a clue about the nature of the problem, you stage many, many resources (some of which will be redundant, unnecessary, or ill-suited) nearby. Thus, once the storm has eased, you can reconnoitre nearer the action for very fast deployment.

And to say that we need a plan and only THEN assemble resources is ass-backwards. You should have an idea of what sorts of things you may need, given likely problems. Big helicopters are often needed and useful on projects much smaller than this (e.g., forest fires). Thus, mobilizing them early (again, even if it turns out to be the case that they're the wrong tool for the job) is best practice.

10. Susan Joyce Thomas on September 16, 2005 11:22 PM writes...

Message in a Bottle - As recent events in New Orleans showed, Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) failed to deploy communication systems that help coordinate among responders and rescuers in emergencies.

A helicopter provided some vital assistance, however. According to an article in the Washington Post on 15 September 2005, the mayor of Greenbelt, MD, "recounted the experience of her police department, which deployed some of its tactical force to New Orleans. The officers were patrolling the streets in an armored car when a helicopter began to hover overhead. The pilot dropped a bottle with a note inside, warning them of a major gas leak in their path.”

The helicopter pilot was resourceful, but so many of the managers at Homeland Security were not.

11. Jmphgxduuot on October 31, 2006 2:20 AM writes...

anime sexy babes anime samurai

12. Charles Derosa on October 31, 2006 1:47 PM writes...

teen boy fetish crossdressing fetish edrc

13. Davis Mcmurray on October 31, 2006 2:20 PM writes...

anlzhbua

14. Mateo Kline on November 1, 2006 1:01 AM writes...

oluzzlgbrv

15. Marquez Story on November 1, 2006 6:38 AM writes...

udsu

16. Liam Harr on November 1, 2006 1:29 PM writes...

orgtydr

17. Liam Harr on November 1, 2006 1:30 PM writes...

orgtydr