Sponsor Message:
Travel Polls & Prefs Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bothered By Water Cannon Salutes?  
User currently offlineQf74 From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 43 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3332 times:

Am I alone in being bothered by water cannon salutes from an environmental standpoint? I know this may be an unpopular point of view but when much of the world is short of water can't we find a better way of acknowledging aviation landmarks?

I'm all for recognizing retiring crew, new aircraft/airlines or any other similar occasions and I also acknowledge that aviation in general is not the most ecologically friendly enterprise but surely within the bounds of practicality, we can do our bit to preserve the planet?

I'm ready to welcome alternative ideas for celebrating milestones along with criticism for being a greenie and just being ignored but I'd really like to hear your thoughts.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3081 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

I can see why you would dislike the water cannon salute, being an Australian. However, I would say it has to do with where you are. I also live in Australia and also think there are different options for celebrating aviation, however, in Norway where unused water flows into the sea, it is not a problem.

Also, water cannon salutes are quite rare, so I don't think the water loss is such a huge problem

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2675 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3270 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

How about a 21-gun salute?  Wink

I think the water cannon salute uses recycled water, anyway, so it doesn't exactly dwindle Australia's water supply. I'm not sure what happens with the storm water drainage, whether that water gets recycled or not. Nonetheless it isn't as much of an environmental impact as using fresh water from the dams.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineAyubogg From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2007, 218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3223 times:



Quoting Qf74 (Thread starter):

I'm glad there are others out there that concern themselves with issues of that nature. I must admit this is the first time I see water salutes as an environmental issue (as an aviation enthusiast I tend to overlook the environmental impact of this industry entirely).

Here's why I think it's an issue. Everyone knows there are poverty-stricken areas in the world that have a huge water shortage, but when you confront a water-waster, they always answer with: "it's not like someone's willing to ship this water here to those people". I get that answer as well when I talk about the huge ammounts of food we Westerners tend to waste. I worked in a restaurant and was shocked by how a little imperfection leads to an entire pound of meat to be tossed.

Anyways, it's not about having someone ship the water or food to those people, but I see it as a slap in their faces when they have to walk two hours each way to obtain a gallon of water when we can simply turn the tap that's ten steps away and have it run for however long we want.

There might be some information we are missing about these salutes. Perhaps the aiport firetrucks are full of rainwater or treated sewage water (let's hope not), or ideally, the whole airport is lined with water-collecting gutters that help recycle this water. Ideally...

Again, I'm glad there is someone that is concerned about such issue. For any issue to be solved, there always has to be someone to bring awareness.

Personally, I would appreciate an escort to the gate from the emergency service vehicles with their lights flashing in a cool formation and just parade around the taxiways more than a water salute, if I were up in the cockpit or a passenger.

Fly green everyone!

-Ayubogg



Alba gu bràth
User currently offlineQf74 From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3156 times:

My eyes were opened when someone explained to me that "there's no new matter in the world" ie, there is the same amount of water now that there has always been, only now it has to go so much further. Thinking about population growth, first there is just the amount of water that physically makes up all the extra people. Then factor in the water used to irrigate crops and livestock to feed these extra people. Then consider how many of these people need swimming pools, golf courses in the middle of the desert and big gulp slurpees. The way I see it, there will always be only so much water to go around and so we should consider our priorities on how we use it whether we live in sub-saharan Africa or next to a huge fresh water lake.

(Taking know-it-all hat off now)


User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2900 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3124 times:

I don't have a problem with it at all. It is an awesome experience to be on one of those planes going through the salute, and just as awesome to be on the ground at an airport watching it happen.

~H81



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlinePITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3236 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3102 times:

I fail to see how this is a waste of water. The truck shoots it out, it lands on the aircraft or airport surface, then evaporates back to where it came from.

The only concern I have is if a plane crashes a moment after two of the airport's fire trucks just emptied their tanks, although foam is preferred for use in an actual emergency.

[Edited 2009-07-06 17:39:52]


FLYi
User currently offlineZKEOJ From New Zealand, joined Feb 2005, 1034 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3046 times:

When I read the heading, I thought "why would anybody?" Then I saw your rationale, and applaud you for your thoughts. I agree with:

Quoting Ayubogg (Reply 3):
I'm glad there are others out there that concern themselves with issues of that nature. I must admit this is the first time I see water salutes as an environmental issue (as an aviation enthusiast I tend to overlook the environmental impact of this industry entirely).

Thanks for raising this issue. I think an escort of fire trucks or so, as suggested above, would do the trick just as well.

Cheers
micha


User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2997 times:

Unless the salute is someplace where there's a drought under way, I just don't really see this as a material issue.

Quoting Ayubogg (Reply 3):
Anyways, it's not about having someone ship the water or food to those people, but I see it as a slap in their faces when they have to walk two hours each way to obtain a gallon of water when we can simply turn the tap that's ten steps away and have it run for however long we want.

How is it a slap in their faces? They don't see pictures of it. They don't know it's happening.

Just think some folks are making a mountain out of a molehill here...


User currently offlineQf74 From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2964 times:



Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 5):
It is an awesome experience to be on one of those planes going through the salute, and just as awesome to be on the ground at an airport watching it happen.

I agree with you 100%, I'd love to see/experience it first hand but that doesn't change the fact I see it as wasteful.

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 8):
Unless the salute is someplace where there's a drought under way, I just don't really see this as a material issue.



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 8):
Just think some folks are making a mountain out of a molehill here...

Maybe so but there are many things that we used to accept as acceptable behavior that we now have to re-assess. In Brisbane it's now illegal to wash your car at home due to water restrictions but once upon a time no one would have thought twice about it. In San Francisco where I now live, we had had 54% of normal rainfall for the current season. This is veering quickly into Non-Av but for more information, this is a great article http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...le=/c/a/2007/07/08/EDGOTQ8JBS1.DTL specifically

"If Americans think water shortage is a problem that only affects less developed nations, they are in for a shock. The Colorado River -- once a mighty force through the Southwest -- no longer reaches the ocean. During the summer months, the Rio Grande disappears from its bed for nearly 200 miles, coming alive again only when it meets the Rio Conches. The water from these rivers keeps golf courses green and water fountains flowing, but their supply diminishes every year. And the effects will be felt sooner than we think. Southwestern states will face threatening shortages as early as 2025."

Anyway, thank you for all your thoughts, it's great to hear differing opinions on an issue and I'm happy just to get people thinking about it.


User currently offlineIAirAllie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2918 times:



Quoting Qf74 (Reply 4):
The way I see it, there will always be only so much water to go around and so we should consider our priorities on how we use it

So where do you think that water goes after the salute? It doesn't just disappear forever. It evaporates and re-enters the water cycle. It has a lot better chance of reaching sub-saharan africa once it's evaporated than it does in an aquifer or lake somewhere.

Quoting ZKEOJ (Reply 7):
Thanks for raising this issue. I think an escort of fire trucks or so, as suggested above, would do the trick just as well.

OH no think of all the gas wasted and the carbon emissions needlessly released into the atmosphere. The horror.

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 8):
Quoting Ayubogg (Reply 3):
Anyways, it's not about having someone ship the water or food to those people, but I see it as a slap in their faces when they have to walk two hours each way to obtain a gallon of water when we can simply turn the tap that's ten steps away and have it run for however long we want.

How is it a slap in their faces? They don't see pictures of it. They don't know it's happening.

Yeah, how silly is that. Slap in the face? So if everyone can't have indoor plumbing and easily accessible water no one should?


User currently offlineWESTERN737800 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 693 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2886 times:

I'm all for the water cannon salute. I read somewhere about a year ago in a dry area where they didn't do it. But if there's plenty of water available then why not do it? I think any little kid in the airplane or watching it would remember it and see that the captain gets the cannon salute and it may be a little extra motivating factor in wanting to become a pilot someday. Football players occasionally dump Gatorade on their coaches and I've never heard about anyone complaining about that. I will always be in favor of the water cannon salute.


Bring back Western Airlines!
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20204 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2822 times:

It raises an interesting debate of what is "necessary."

Example: I, for one, love the Blue Angels. I have lots of friends who deride it as a waste of money and fuel. But I view it as art.

Art's important. Human expression is important. That's what makes us human. Even in a busy, industrial environment like an airport where you never see most of the people who are making it all operate, the occasional human gesture is the reason we are humans. We aren't ants in a hive, no matter how much we might look like it at first glance. Everybody in the airport is working of his own accord. So when they do well, they feel happy about it. When someone else does well, they feel happy about it.

A water cannon salute uses very little water in the grand scheme of things. Stopping them would be a meaningless action. I'm sure it's 0.000001% of water use in the world or less.

But they are rare. How many have you ever seen? I have never seen one.


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6451 posts, RR: 38
Reply 13, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2819 times:



Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 5):
I don't have a problem with it at all. It is an awesome experience to be on one of those planes going through the salute, and just as awesome to be on the ground at an airport watching it happen.

Yeah, I can tell you now that it's such an awesome experience! Need more of them too!

Over here in Auckland, I don't regard it as a waste of water. They're only using a couple of thousand of litres at the max - such a value is minute compared to how much water is lost in a city from dripping taps or leaks somewhere in the system anyway. Also, we have to know that the fire brigade can actually use the equipment properly for when a real situation comes. How often do they use it? I don't know. But at least they do get some more practice with water cannon salutes.

So from my personal view, I don't see it being such a waste of water, especially in New Zealand. We've got too much water. They were sending a lot of water down the overflows earlier this year and you could theoretically say that's a waste when you could bucket that and send it to Africa. Reality and truth shows that it's nye on impossible for us to be able to ship so much water economically to places who need it. IIRC it's banned in Australia anyway, or at least in SYD? Remember that the salute is a rarity/is infrequent anyway. But peoples' taps continue to leak. What can really be done to stop that?

There's my side, I hope it balances up the argument a little bit!



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineDL752 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 174 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2819 times:



Quoting PITrules (Reply 6):
The only concern I have is if a plane crashes a moment after two of the airport's fire trucks just emptied their tanks, although foam is preferred for use in an actual emergency.

That's a good point but for safety purposes I would think that there would be at least one vehicle available for an emergency if one were to happen. Just a guess.
DL752 Smile


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6451 posts, RR: 38
Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2818 times:



Quoting DL752 (Reply 14):
That's a good point but for safety purposes I would think that there would be at least one vehicle available for an emergency if one were to happen. Just a guess.

Depends on how big the airport is.. I'm pretty sure there are minimum requirements etc for a certain size. AKL itself has 5 or 6 tenders so it leaves 3 or 4 spare. Plus it depends on the size of the aircraft for how much water it uses. The A380 I was in must have used up substantially more water than the A320 salute did, therefore allowing the tenders to still have water in them. Mind you, they also carry foam which does more than water when helping put the fire out.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineL410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5739 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2817 times:

There is nothing wrong about being bothered by water cannon salutes from an environmental standpoint, however I think they're so infrequent and on the grand scale of things so miniscule when it comes to use of water on an airport, it is really an innocent fun.
If we look at an average size airport, I think there are other areas where proper attention could make a real difference, e.g.:
- fitting toilets/sinks with "intelligent" flushing so millions of litres of water are not being wasted every day/week/month
- efficient dryers (those "airblade" things I've seen at SFO are excellent) so there is no paper waste
- design terminals in such a way and use such materials which prevent need for excessive air conditioning/heating
- airport vehicles having properly inflated tyres to improve gas milage
etc.

And let's not get into the incredible waste being caused by excessive taxiing.


User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2923 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2632 times:

I think it depends on where the airport is.
In countries like New Zealand and Norway where there is plenty of water just running out into the sea's then in my opinion it's not a problem.

But in countries where there is a shortage because of drought or maybe it's just because there is not much water due to minimal rainfall because of geographical reasons then I think they should find another way of saluting planes, even if it is recycled. It cost a lot of money and energy to recycle so it should not be wasted for reason's like that.



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineWESTERN737800 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 693 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2599 times:



Quoting PITrules (Reply 6):
The only concern I have is if a plane crashes a moment after two of the airport's fire trucks just emptied their tanks, although foam is preferred for use in an actual emergency.

I would think most airports would have more than 2 tenders, so most should have a backup at the ready. And if the backups are being used I think the two trucks doing the salute could be loaded in pretty short order. Most of the cannon salutes I've seen on video were at huge airports, so hopefully that wouldn't be a factor.



Bring back Western Airlines!
User currently offlineFalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6157 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2591 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 16):
those "airblade" things I've seen at SFO are excellent

They have those at DTW too. I really like those. I still like to have a towel around too so I can dry my face.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 16):
airport vehicles having properly inflated tyres to improve gas milage

Also they need to be in tune. A poor running engine wastes fuel too.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Flying CO Business First Operated By VS! posted Mon Jan 19 2009 07:24:32 by Delta777Jet
Is This Good PR By Qantas? posted Sat Jan 17 2009 02:23:23 by Sflaflight
Hotels By MXP posted Tue Dec 16 2008 19:50:07 by TK787
747 Routes That Were Replaced By Tristars? posted Sun Nov 23 2008 15:32:29 by 747400sp
Airports Only Served By One Airline posted Fri Jul 25 2008 11:44:16 by Bbinn333
Shortest City Pair By Jet? posted Sat Jul 12 2008 07:51:44 by Comorin
So, Who's Been Tagged By The Ssss Lately? posted Wed Jul 9 2008 14:41:45 by LASOctoberB6
BOS-MCO By 6am posted Sun May 18 2008 19:57:43 by Dukebluedevil
What If Midway Was Bought By The Goodnights? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 18:24:39 by ERJ170
Aircraft Considered But Never Ordered By Airline. posted Fri Mar 21 2008 13:12:14 by Bmacleod