[ted_dunning]

If you look at recent California fires, those with single initiating events occurred under very high wind conditions (> 100kph sustained) which would make drone flight impossible. Besides, such events spread to several acres within minutes of initiation. Dropping a few water balloons will do absolutely nothing.

Other major incidents has enormous numbers of initiating events. Leading up to the CNZ complex, there were over 10,000 lighting strikes in one night in the San Francisco Bay Area alone. These drones would have been completely useless here as well.

The video also claims that a single drone can handle 40 acres. There are over 800 million acres of forest in the US. Buying 20 million drones is one thing, but keeping them flying is pretty much inconceivable given how quickly most toys of this sort quit working under field conditions.

[themodelplumber]

> those with single initiating events occurred under very high wind conditions (> 100kph sustained)

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean by "single initiating events"...is PG&E negligence or arson counted?

I can name a number of local fires here in rural NorCal that would have been benefitted by drones with this tech. In each case a minimum of 4 aircraft were dispatched after an officer visited the scene. I have to wonder how the situation might be different with a new idea like this. Would it be so bad to keep trying and improving on such concepts?

[kfarr]

The drones also have sizable batteries. If it crashes in high winds and then starts to burn not sure it’s being so helpful. Then who is liable for that?

[allisdust]

What we need is a water balloon shooting rail gun. Useful for targeting from distance and can be loaned out to cops for crowd control when not in use.