Martin Mars have been sold

Django · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:10 am

What does Kee Bird have to do with anything? It sat for decades and then they tried to fly it out with horredous consequences. The 2 Mars have been operational for years...

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:19 am

Mustangdriver, the circumstances surrounding the loss of KeeBird are vastly different than how the Mars are operated. A very proffesional operation up in B.C. Suggest you do a little research on how these aircraft actually fight a fire before you decide they should be parked. They fly their missions in a very different manner than other smaller bombers.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 3:10 pm

All I meant was that there are only two of these things left why continue to fly them till they drop? All I meant witht he Kee Bird statment is that flying isn't always the best route. If a museum had done the recovery of the KeeBird, she would still be here today. I was only compapring Keebird on the comment flying them is better than sitting in a museum (which in my opinion is not always the case). You guys can't honestly tell me that you haven't thought about the mars not making it to retirement due to crashes. I have, and I can see us all here talking about how someone should have saved one of them.

jwc50 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 3:26 pm

Mustangdriver - I think your overall point is well taken. If it hasn't yet, I don't know when the time will be reached when it will be reasonable to retire these two airplanes. But preservation of at least one has to be of primary importance sooner or later.

Jase · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:20 pm

Ya know, I may regret this...but here goes anyway.

Mustangdriver, the reason KeeBird was lost (not to mention Rick Kriege) was due to the towering ego of one person, who was TOLD about the propensity of the APU's to eat fuel pump diaphragms, but paid no attention..

I find it thoroughly objectionable that you compare the debacle that was the KeeBird deal to ANYTHING having to do with Timber West, MacBlo, or the Mars'.

BTW, to my knowledge, the ONLY possible way to recover KeeBird other than sawing her up into small enough pieces, was to fly her out.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:32 pm

Guys I am not comparing the two it was bad wording on my part. All I meant by it was that flying an airplane isn't always the best choice for it. I shouldn't have used Keebird as an example, but it came to mind. And Keebird could have been dismantled not "sawed" and put back together where it could have been done in the safety of an airport and hangar. Remember a man lost his life in that deal. But I don't mean that keebird has anything to do with this other than a bad comparison used as a response on my part. Now as for the people still using them, I still tink it is time to retire them to a museum. IT is just my point of view.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:35 pm

Wow

As only a witness to this specific thread, I think both sides ARE extremely valid. And the people in charge of making this decision, will make the right decision. Whatever that might be.

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:42 pm

I agree the plan to fly KeeBird out was sound. The execution sucked.

Just because a museum wasn't involved doesn't mean it will be done right.

Ask the guys about the professional way that the aircraft were recovered from Lake Washington. Oh wait the "professional who knew it all broke the aircraft up before it reached the surface. You can still see on the bottom of the lake.

I see you have been drinking the NMUSAF koolaid again. These guys are arrogant as hell with this "only we can do it right so you miscreants out there leave our aircraft alone", attitude.

And I'm not making the above quote up, I was actually told this in almost those exact words by an NMUSAF/USAF employee.

The ONLY reason the Mars aircraft are even around is that private citizens had the foresight to buy them from the US Navy and put them to work. I guarantee you that those aircraft would have been scrapped long before the Naval Air Museum was formed. Look at the history of the early aircraft in both museums. Most were not saved by the repective museums, they were acquired by the museums many many years after the museums were started.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:54 pm

No Rick I haven't been drinking the kool aide again :wink:

I guess I agree with your statment about Keebird as far as flying it out was a good idea, the event sucked. But enough about Keebird, it was my mistake to bring it up. I am sure that the guys that were actually there feel plent bad about it. At leas they had the courage to try. As for the Mars you are right that the Navy would have more than likely cut them up, but here we are in 2007 and they are still around. Maybe we should look into preserving them. That is all I am trying to say. I know where you are coming form with your relationships with the museum, but the Gen. has done alot of good for preserved aircraft and for our museum.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:06 am

The aircraft still have several thousand hours of airframe life left on them, why should they retire them now when, airframe wise, they're very young? The aircraft are used only when necessary, and they are very conservative with the types of terrain in which they can be used to ensure that they don't get into situations where they might overstress the airframe. They have NOS engines to last another 10-15 years, great mechanics, and they've taken great care of the birds up to now, I see nothing to indicate that it won't continue to happen in the future.

I honestly see the Mars as similar to the Convair 240s & 580s that Bud & Noel operate out of Columbus. Some of those aircraft have nearly 10,000 hours left on their airframes, why retire them when there's still plenty of spare parts to keep them flying and doing what they were built to do - make money.

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:02 am

True but there are tons of Convairs left. Only tow mars my point is not that they can't fly just that with only two left in the world maybe one should retire.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:53 am

Tons? Yeah, there's just shy of 60 Convair 580s flying, but the rest of the fleet is a different story.

There are EIGHT Convair 240/T-29s still flying (2 at Air Tahoma, 1 at Desert Air Cargo, 2 at Rhodes, 1 at Aeronaves, 1 at Buffalo, and 1 at Wings of Hope.

There are 9 C-131B/D/E/H/Fs out there. Of those, 2 are museum aircraft (CAF & Yanks) and 3 are in mosquito control service.

There are 2 CV-340s and 5 CV-440s still airworthy.

There are 5 CV-640s still airworthy.

There is ONE CV-600 still airworthy.

davem · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:03 pm

I guess I see things in a slightly different light on the fly vs. No fly arguments.

The Mars are not flying for ‘social’ purposes (ie: Airshows, etc). They are arguably the best aerial firefighting vehicles in the world. They have literally saved hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars in forests, homes and businesses over the past 45 years – not to mention perhaps a life or two. For this reason, I think grounding them would be a terrible mistake.

They are working aircraft, doing an outstanding job that no other single piece of equipment can duplicate.

There are two Martin Mars left. Given the economics of supporting such an operation, if something horrible was to happen the remaining aircraft would certainly be retired and preserved.

As others have mentioned. The Mars would long ago been scrapped if not for their aerial firefighting role. One day they will retire, but they are still in their prime and irreplaceable in their role.

jwc50 · **Posted:** Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:35 am

Recent release from the Glenn L. Martin Maryland Aviation Museum regarding the efforts to acquire a Mars aircraft:

http://www.marylandaviationmuseum.org/mars/index.html

I am happy to have supported this effort, and I look forward to the museum at some future point eventually successfully obtaining one of these aircraft from the new owners.

BLR · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 2:47 pm **Posts:** 425

Quote:

Coulson welcomes bombers
Julia Caranci, Alberni Valley Times
Published: Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Port Alberni's Mars Bombers may fight fires out of province and even out of country for their new owners, said Wayne Coulson, CEO and president of the Coulson Group of Companies.

TimberWest and Coulson announced last Friday afternoon that ownership of the beloved planes will remain in local hands, becoming the property of Coulson Aircrane (a subsidiary of the Coulson Group), a company with expertise in heli-logging, firefighting, construction heavy lifting, airframe overhaul and fabrication.

Coulson told the Times the bombers will be a unique addition to the company's commercial fire fighting concern, which currently consists of North America's largest civilian fleet of five Sikorsky S-61 helicopters.

Considering the bombers were privately owned and operated for the last 47 years, Coulson admits there will be some work involved in integrating them into the international commercial fire fighting market. But he says the planes have a high value and could be an incredible asset to the company.

"When you take the emotion out of it, they can be exceptionally cost-effective tools in the right situation," he said.

Emotion is a good word to describe the feelings the bombers inspire in Port Alberni residents.

Hearing news of the sale last week, Port Alberni Mayor Ken McRae called the announcement "fantastic" and said the planes could not have gone to a better company.

Coulson himself said he's received phone calls congratulating him on the purchase including a bouquet of flowers from a thankful resident.

He remembers a photo taken of himself when he was five or six years old with the bombers in the background. Little did he know he would one day own the giant aircraft. "This is a great opportunity for us from a family perspective," Coulson said.

The big question mark for him now is where the planes will end up being based. While he has every intention of keeping them at their existing location on Sproat Lake, it is possible one or both of the planes could be contracted out for periods of time to clients in Canada and specific locations in the US and Australia.

"Our customers may feel they want to store the planes at a more strategic location to protect their assets," he explained.

Three of Coulson's fire fighting helicopters will soon return to Canada after being based in Melbourne for the last three months, for example. They have been fighting wildfires in Australia, which this summer had one of its worst fire seasons in history. Another of Coulson's helicopters will soon be stationed at a US army base, putting out fires created during training activities.

But Coulson cautions it's still too early to know where the planes will serve the best use.

"The big opportunity we have here is no one knows much about these aircraft in the wildfire business," he said. "It's a huge business and everyone is looking for a new black box to put out fires."

Coulson said two other large aircraft for fire fighting purposes are in the development stages, but neither is as efficient as the Mars. One, a modified DC-10, has the same capacity as the Mars, but must land to load up with water, requiring both a long runway and lengthy turnaround time.

"If you have water nearby you can refill the Mars in 25 seconds," Coulson said. "It's superior."

The company will no doubt find a niche for the planes in the coming weeks and months.

© Alberni Valley Times 2007

Warbird Information Exchange

Martin Mars have been sold

Who is online