Elk Creek Fire demonstrating high level of competence

Thanks netdude. I hope Andy is going to rebuild and incorporate all the good things he had before. I hope to meet up with him some day. Have another friend over on Richmond Hill with an excellent view like Andy who calls in lots of smokes. The fire departments get to know us well. That is how I met the North Fork Fire Chief. A lot of smokes I saw are/were in his district. He or anyone from his district have always been very attentive and caring. Every call is important and they check. Can't say the same for the district I actually live in. I hope Andy will be able to continue to do the same.

No matter what you do to mitigate the fire danger, it may not save your home under some conditions.

But, everything you do to mitigate the danger improves your chances, I believe.

I also believe that what you do, or don't do, affects the chances for your neighbors.

http://kdvr.com/2012/04/13/first-conclu ... stigation/

Nice to watch. Thanks for the link Becky. Want to see what they decide. And so very grateful that the agencies involved declined comment.

Have to wonder though about how they plan to fix the communications - redundant they say but what does that really mean? will it work and will they be able to actually communicate with each other.

lots of cell phones don't work in that area so not the least surprised that they failed.

jf1acai wrote: No matter what you do to mitigate the fire danger, it may not save your home under some conditions.

But, everything you do to mitigate the danger improves your chances, I believe.

I also believe that what you do, or don't do, affects the chances for your neighbors.

On the other side of the coin, too, is the fact that your mitigation is only as good as the mitigation OF your neighbors. We have 35 acres bordering both chartered and private residential lands. We've done defensible space and completed 20 of our 35 acres working in conjunction with both JeffCO and the state Forest Service to make sure we did it right. The last 15 acres is a real struggle because, while the chartered land has been mitigated, the residential, for the most part, has not. If they go up, we go up - nothing we do can or will change that sad to say. In the areas we've done, the grasses have come back in, the wildlife has returned, and the trees are looking a lot healthier than they did under previous owners. It's just hard keeping the motivation to do the rest when the neighbors don't do their part, too.

Have to agree Zhawke that can be an issue. Have you talked to your neighbors about helping them with their mitigation or at the very least allowing you to do some on their property closer to your home. We did that with one of the neighbors. They agreed because it created a break that benefits both. Our major problem is that the national forest has not been mitigated so it remains a major hazard, particularly with the steep slope.

My aunt is next to a home that has many 50 foot trees right next to the deck. No break whatsoever. The only thing she has going for her is that she has cleared 100 feet every direction which still might not be enough. She also has a pond, generator and pump so maybe they might be able to save her place.

I would be interested in learning more about the foam, although it might not work for her unless one of us is present to apply when needed.

We have been working with a friends on their property and since they adjoin a subdivision and the two closest homes have/had children so they made it a priority to thin trees next to the property line. But one idiot neighbor doesn't want to cut the trees cuz then light might shine in her windows. Ever heard of shades? Sometimes I can't understand people.

mtntrekker wrote: Have to agree Zhawke that can be an issue. Have you talked to your neighbors about helping them with their mitigation or at the very least allowing you to do some on their property closer to your home. We did that with one of the neighbors. They agreed because it created a break that benefits both. Our major problem is that the national forest has not been mitigated so it remains a major hazard, particularly with the steep slope.

My aunt is next to a home that has many 50 foot trees right next to the deck. No break whatsoever. The only thing she has going for her is that she has cleared 100 feet every direction which still might not be enough. She also has a pond, generator and pump so maybe they might be able to save her place.

I would be interested in learning more about the foam, although it might not work for her unless one of us is present to apply when needed.

We have been working with a friends on their property and since they adjoin a subdivision and the two closest homes have/had children so they made it a priority to thin trees next to the property line. But one idiot neighbor doesn't want to cut the trees cuz then light might shine in her windows. Ever heard of shades? Sometimes I can't understand people.

How true. Yes, we've talked with the neighbors with varying degrees of cooperation. One didn't want to disturb his "karmic link" to his land, another thinned some, another did defensible space around their house but their property line is so close to our house in one spot and that's the spot they didn't want to thin at all. So, we're looking at trees that are marked blue for thinning (by the state forester (and can't do anything about it). As a result, we concentrate on our property knowing we're doing the right thing to promote a healthy forest, and hoping we never have a fire in our area, cuz if the neighbor's property goes up in flames fire travels uphill and our house will be toast.

Bummer ZHawke. Here hoping that this last fire will help them see that the trees need to be cut, especially since fire can roar down a hill like it did for Hi Meadow cutting huge swaths on its way to Pine. The Lower Fork Fire was slowed in some areas because of a road and a large meadow. Without it more than likely it would have raced right back down the hill. I thought it was going to take out Coffeepot and Maxwell House section the way it was moving.

I am not sure if this is the right place, feel free to move it. Perhaps there is something to be learned from the troops.

The DOD has been working on it since at least 1979.


http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htcbts ... 20415.aspx

"Shed No Tears For JTRS
April 15, 2012: For over a decade, the multi-billion dollar JTRS (Joint Tactical Radio System) program has been a major embarrassment for the U.S. Department of Defense. In response JTRS has been quietly put down. Oh, JTRS still exists, on paper, but its goal, to provide better combat radios, has been accomplished by adopting civilian radios that do what the troops needed done, and calling it JTRS.
The main problem is that the troops need digital (for computer stuff) and analog (traditional radio) communications in one box and it has to be programmable, in order to handle new applications and the need to communicate with other radio types. That's what JTRS was supposed to do, but it never happened. The procurement bureaucracy and government contractors consumed over six billion dollars, but never quite got anything useful out the door.

Meanwhile, the war on terror gave the U.S. Army a chance to buy new radio technology they needed, and that's what they did. In the last decade the army, air force and marines have spent over six billion dollars on new hand held and backpack radios, to tie the infantry into a battlefield Internet, as well as larger radio sets for headquarters and vehicles. This is more than five times what the Department of Defense spent on new radios in the three years before September 11, 2001. Back then, everyone was holding off on buying new radios, because JTRS was to be available in 2007. Well 2007 came and went with no JTRS in sight. How did this happen?

There are many problems getting all the services to agree on "Joint" standards. Typical are the problems with the software. The Department of Defense insisted that manufacturers use specific software tools and supporting software for JTRS work. Rather than just tell manufacturers to, "make it work," the Pentagon bureaucrats insisted on getting into the details. This backfired, as it usually does when bureaucrats do that sort of thing. It has happened before. In the 1970s, when the Pentagon tried to force defense contractors to use a new software language, ADA, for all military related work, much confusion and missed deadlines ensued.

The Pentagon was very reluctant to admit error, or defeat, in these matters. Much better to spend billions more and let the needed equipment arrive late, and missing important capabilities. It's something of a tradition. And you know how some people in the military, even Pentagon civilians, can be about tradition.

Meanwhile, the military took the JTRS concept, and had radio manufacturers take commercial designs and adapt it, quickly, for military use. An example of this is SOCOM (Special Operations Command) buying half a billion dollars' worth of AN/PRC-150 radios. These cost about $2,500 each and all of them were delivered over the last three years. The 4.6 kg (ten pounds, without batteries) radios are very flexible (are used in vehicles or backpacks), and are able to use several different types of transmission (including bouncing signals off the ionosphere, for longer range, or just to get a signal out of a built up area.) Digital transmissions allow for data to get through under poor atmospheric conditions, or when in a built up area. The radios also have good encryption, and the ability to send and receive all forms of digital data. These radios are also now used by the army.

A similar situation occurred back in the 1990s, when SOCOM realized it needed a new personal radio for its troops, and JTRS was supposed to take care of that as well. Rather than wait, SOCOM got together with a radio manufacturer, told them what they needed, and within two years they had MBITR (which soon got official sanction as AN/PRC-148). When the rest of the army saw MBITR, many troops bought them with their own money. After Iraq, army units began buying the AN/PRC-148 on their own. Soon, over 100,000 MBITR radios were in use.

With JTRS behind schedule, over budget and under review, the customers decided that JTRS was not the future. Originally, the services pledged to buy nearly half a million JTRS radios. Those orders fell to about 148,000 three years ago and now to zero. All that remains will be the basic JTRS idea, talked to death by the committees that were supposed to make it happen. But because of the war, the radios needed got developed anyway, under realistic conditions, and largely outside the JTRS bureaucracy. It's a battle that was largely unreported, but at least the good guys won.

SOCOM's efforts to go out and get the radios they need indicates they didn't expect the long awaited JTRS (Joint Tactical Radio System), which is designed so that all services can use it, to arrive any time soon. JTRS was never short of development problems, but the troops needed digital (for computer stuff) and analog (traditional radio) communications in one box right now and it had to be programmable, in order to handle new applications.

The army and marines followed the lead of SOCOM, as they often do when the procurement establishment lets them down. JTRS is still in the pipeline, and pieces of it are starting to show up. Meanwhile, the troops have improvised, as they are frequently forced to do.

Adapt and Overcome