What way do you think is a good option to get quickly water three miles inland from the ocean to the Palisades fire that fire officials aren't already doing? There are already helicopter teams dropping ocean water on the Palisades fire. It's much further inland to the Altadena fire.
I don't know. I'm not an engineer and haven't really thought about it much.
We're just outside of the evacuation zone, but can see the Palisades fire from our house. Air quality is very bad. Occasionally getting some ash dropping. Not many people outside because of it, so it feel eerily empty in many ways. Kids have been remote for school since Wednesday. Community has been really incredible for the most part rallying to support the people who are displaced from their homes. We have some friends who have moved in with us who are praying their home a half mile from one of the burn lines doesn't fall. Lots of uncertainty from the threat of winds, but they are starting to get some containment.
Quickly?
The Vegas tunnels have progressed 1.7 miles (maybe halfway the distance needed) in 4 years and that is in the desert with a fixed objective (not through mountains emerging from sea level.) Do you really think there's some quick and easy way to divert ocean water uphill to a fire moving rapidly to new locations due to embers blown by incredibly strong winds?
I'd be interested in learning the insights you have from afar. Striking that you thought it was an abomination to change leadership last night in the middle of an emergency but advocate for it today. Very likely could just be me, but seems like political posturing more than an interest in effective emergency management.
It’s not Monday. It’s Sunday.
To get the water where? It's not like the fire is in the same place time. Do you think there is a better holding area for large amounts of ocean water than the ocean? What's the delivery mechanism to directly go to each different fire?
I don't think its a quick or easy solution, just a doable one. Given the amount of damage done, it seems like it would be reasonable to do if you could do it for a few billion dollars. Hell, I didn't think it was practicable to catch a returning rocket until a few months ago.
Budget cuts have impacts? And here I thought there was all kinds of waste to be rooted out of government.
These are precisely the kinds of problems engineers solve.
There is.
Cut it out. Cut. It. Out.
Engineers don't chase massive engineering problems without a clear objective and route to get there.
as counterintuitive as it sounds you'd think insurance and reinsurance companies might invest in this shit. that they could build a coop of sorts to invest in mitigation practices. dumping a couple bil to mitigate whether in calif or the gulf of america would presumably save a fortune compared to the hundreds of billions they'll pay out.
I guess I'm confused by where the tunnels would go and why they would solve the Woodley Fire, the Hurst Fire, the Eaton fire, and others all of which are spread out far across the area.
Let it climb the hills (can't stop it anyway) and cur your fire breaks on the down hill side. Then hope and pray.
Just commenting on a pic and a thought that came to mind, hoos. Not blaming anyone. Just wondering out loud.
What about using all the underground tunnels that the Qanon people tell me the Hollywood pedos use to smuggle the children in?
The objective is to have sufficient resources and systems in place to combat these fires when and where they happen. The water supply is close and plentiful. The means to marshall and utilize it in large quantities quickly, at undetermined locations is a problem that likely could be solved…but, best I can tell, simply hasn’t been very strongly pursued.
With all due respect, which in your case is zero, proximity offers a wide variety of opportunities for information that you'll never have. That amount of information that you don't have is staggering. That's mostly because you are a colossal imbecile who is uninterested in actually gathering and critically evaluating information, but it's also because there are sources that come with proximity that you have no access to.
What’s your opinion on Bass cuts to Firefighter budget and requests for more? Or is the reporting inaccurate?
My bad, Brad. That was really directed at crazed, who didn't want to answer a direct question about it and just opine vaguely. Sorry for being grouchy about it. I knew your heart was in the right place on that.
My understanding is that the overall fire department budget didn't go down. It went up, but there were cuts to some areas that were offset by increases in other areas. There's certainly a need for discussion when all of this is done about how resources are allocated. The firefighters fighting this have been heroic and the Sheriff, who I'm not a huge fan of at all, has seemingly done a really great job in addressing the tragedy.
Meh…I haven’t had too many issues with their accuracy.
Did you listen to Crowley’s interview about their budget?
As is mine, hoos. As is mine.
www.latimes.com
So what they’re saying is that the overall budget went up - but at the expense of moving funds away from acquiring the necessary resources?Did Mayor Karen Bass really cut the fire department budget? The answer gets tricky
Employee raises and other expenses are expanding the Los Angeles Fire Department's budget. At the same time, the agency has had to scale back operations in recent months.
OK. And it’s important to have all the relevant information.
