Pacific Palisades Fire Threatening Santa Monica, California

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    california Fire
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
125 replies · 11K views
Another new fire: The Kenneth Fire - the North side of the 101 out by Hidden Hills
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I still don't understand why people think you can fight these fires directly. Short of a literal tsunami, you cannot place enough water on target to fight something like this. Protect evacuation routes, protect the people getting out, defend critical infrastructure if you feel it's actually defensible without risking the lives of the fire fighters... that's what you can do.

There's a movie I'm fond of that has a memorable line... "There are things you can't fight. Acts of God. You see a hurricane coming? You get out of the way." That's what we're facing here, and trying to protect everything of even moderate importance is going to be a failure. They have to triage and protect what has to be protected, no more. They don't have the equipment, supplies, or manpower to do more.

That said, the aerial fight has been going better than I had dared hope. They put in way more flight time and way more drops than I was expecting today given the weather conditions, and that's going to buy vital time for the folks on the ground.
 
Reply
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Ivan Seeking
Another new fire is being reported in the (San Fernando I assume) Valley, according to a fire Chief.
 
berkeman said:
And to add insult to injury, it looks like there have been several large-scale evacuation orders sent out to people's phones by mistake:

https://www.nbcnews.com/weather/wil...os-angeles-area-millions-residents-rcna187091

Ouch. The good news is that they are starting to get some containment on some of the fires...
I have seen a number of people like one older couple who evacuated to their daughter's home and lost everything. Then they and their daughter's family had to evacuate and they too lost everything.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
One reason they lost water in some areas was the loss of power.
Source, please? SCE is denying this, even though people in positions to know the truth (eg, POTUS) keep repeating it.
 
Flyboy said:
I still don't understand why people think you can fight these fires directly. Short of a literal tsunami, you cannot place enough water on target to fight something like this. Protect evacuation routes, protect the people getting out, defend critical infrastructure if you feel it's actually defensible without risking the lives of the fire fighters... that's what you can do.

There's a movie I'm fond of that has a memorable line... "There are things you can't fight. Acts of God. You see a hurricane coming? You get out of the way." That's what we're facing here, and trying to protect everything of even moderate importance is going to be a failure. They have to triage and protect what has to be protected, no more. They don't have the equipment, supplies, or manpower to do more.

That said, the aerial fight has been going better than I had dared hope. They put in way more flight time and way more drops than I was expecting today given the weather conditions, and that's going to buy vital time for the folks on the ground.
I heard they try to fight it, due to the affluent nature of the people who live there.
 
1000010169.jpg
 
gmax137 said:
Source, please? SCE is denying this, even though people in positions to know the truth (eg, POTUS) keep repeating it.
POTUS and I'm sure other people interviewed. I have heard a number of explanations including
  • the loss of power
  • the loss of pumping capacity
  • depletion of the emergency water storage due to too large of a load on the system.
  • There were too many trucks trying to use water - the demand simply exceeded the pump capacity.
  • Areas ravaged by fire had uncontrolled leaks spewing water needed to fight the front line.
 
MidgetDwarf said:
I heard they try to fight it, due to the affluent nature of the people who live there.
Here in Nevada, the fire fighters always try to defend property (houses, buildings) threatened by wildfire. They don't care if it is a big house or a small ranch house or even a garage. After a fire is contained, I have often seen a single house of building still standing, surrounded by scorched earth. They do this by dropping water all around the structure they're defending. I imagine the same is true in southern Cali. The steep terrain and the 100 mph Santa Anna winds made this impossible in this week's fires, I don't think the income of the residents plays any part in it. In fact, that suggestion is an insult to the fire fighters.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD, pinball1970, russ_watters and 3 others
Ivan Seeking said:
POTUS and I'm sure other people interviewed. I have heard a number of explanations including
  • the loss of power
  • the loss of pumping capacity
  • depletion of the emergency water storage due to too large of a load on the system.
  • There were too many trucks trying to use water - the demand simply exceeded the pump capacity.
  • Areas ravaged by fire had uncontrolled leaks spewing water needed to fight the front line.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/palisades-fire-hydrants-ran-out-of-water/

I can't find the SCE statement again now. EDIT: But from the Snopes piece
The LADWP said in an email on Jan. 9: "There is no lack of water flowing through our pipes or flowing to the Palisades area. Water remains available in Palisades, but is limited in areas at elevation, impacting fire hydrants."

According to Quiñones, the department followed emergency procedures ahead of the windstorm that exacerbated the Los Angeles wildfires on Jan. 7. She told reporters on Jan. 8 (at the 27:30 time stamp):
In preparation for the windstorm LADWP activated its emergency preparation plans and filled all 114 available water reservoirs and storage facilities throughout the city including the three 1 million-gallon tanks in the Palisades area. We also fueled all our generators serving our pump stations to ensure water will flow out through the emergency.
Note the part, "We also fueled all our generators serving our pump stations..."

I don't want to get banned for talking about why Biden is propping up the California state politicians.
 
MidgetDwarf said:
I heard they try to fight it, due to the affluent nature of the people who live there.
I work a lot with FFs, and I'm with gmax on this. FFs don't fight fires based on saving famous people's homes first. Please don't suggest that.

Just a reminder for everybody to post links to credible sources of information on things like the loss of power to pumping stations, etc. There should be such credible sources, although in the fog of war, it may take a couple weeks for them to surface.
 
Last edited:
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970, russ_watters, dlgoff and 2 others
Ivan Seeking said:
See the video of Biden explaining that power was turned off to prevent creating more fires
https://thehill.com/video/biden-say...s-led-to-california-water-shortages/10357741/
I'm inclined to think that POTUS had good sources of information, but this is a counterpoint that I also think is pretty credible:
gmax137 said:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/palisades-fire-hydrants-ran-out-of-water/

I can say from personal experience that when a firefighting engine hooks up to a hydrant in a neighborhood to start pumping water, that the pressure to normal water outlets (like me fighting the neighborhood home fire with a garden hose) tanks to nothing. So it's reasonable that at higher elevations with multiple taps into the water system that the pressure would drop enough to starve those higher hydrants.

We may well need to wait for the fog to clear and an After Action Report (AAR) to be issued to know whether the power company was culpable in this loss of water.
 
I have heard a couple of interesting facts in interviews with experts here. I report what has been said, I cannot provide sources though.
  • Rain (if not directly on the flames) and droughts are irrelevant. The hot and dry Santa Ana coming from the desert works like a hair dryer. Any humidity would have been blown away anyway once it is burning - from an interview with a park ranger.
  • A study - they named the source, but it was too quick on TV to write it down, sounded like McKansey - showed that 100% of wildfires in the area in the past five years were caused by arson, not necessarily willfully but artificially.
  • Such an event has nothing to do with climate change. Yes, droughts do, but see above. If at all, then climate change will have a lowering impact on Santa Ana since a warming ocean will smoothen the isobars relative to the desert.
  • Such events are normal in the area, even though several causes contributed to this time's devastating effects. It is a general problem that we face all over the world. People settle in dangerous areas: wildfires in California, volcanos in Napoli, bottomlands in central Europe, or coastlines everywhere.
  • They also discussed whether wood as the preferred construction material could have played a role. The answer was no. Wood is better regarding the risk of earthquakes and bricks aren't any better. It's the point of attacks that matter like dry leaves in gutters, dry lawns, etc.
  • Precaution is the only long-term solution. They said that Mexico on the other side of the border deals better with it in this respect. I cannot comment on this, so I just repeat what a science journalist has said on German TV.
I found these interviews interesting and even without quoting a source worth a thought. Still better than what some politicians come up with forcing firefighters to state that they, I quote "don't play politics".
 
fresh_42 said:
I have heard a couple of interesting facts in interviews with experts here. I report what has been said, I cannot provide sources though.
  • Rain (if not directly on the flames) and droughts are irrelevant. The hot and dry Santa Ana coming from the desert works like a hair dryer. Any humidity would have been blown away anyway once it is burning - from an interview with a park ranger.
There was a map showing that the fire lines stopped almost exactly where the severe drought area ends.
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/08/us/maps-visuals-los-angeles-wildfires-dg/index.html
 
Ivan Seeking said:
There was a map showing that the fire lines stopped almost exactly where the severe drought area ends.
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/08/us/maps-visuals-los-angeles-wildfires-dg/index.html
Maybe that would need a closer look at aspects like plantings, constructions, and so on. CNN also showed a map of the Palisades fire that abruptly stopped in a straight line at the county border. So much to their reliability. Or the one south of it, I don't remember exactly. I just wondered about that straight.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970 and russ_watters
I think we can agree, that there's a difference between "shutting off power" and "shutting off power to the fire pumps." Especially in light of the statement that the fire pumps have their own generators.

@berkeman makes a good point about not rushing to conclusions.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, 256bits and Ivan Seeking
fresh_42 said:
Maybe that would need a closer look at aspects like plantings, constructions, and so on. CNN also showed a map of the Palisades fire that abruptly stopped in a straight line at the county border. So much to their reliability. Or the one south of it, I don't remember exactly. I just wondered about that straight.
I was thinking the factors that drive the drought may also play a role affecting the course of the fire. For example, a mountain ridge or a change in elevation could be factors. Said another way, topology could have played a role in both cases.
 
gmax137 said:
I think we can agree, that there's a difference between "shutting off power" and "shutting off power to the fire pumps." Especially in light of the statement that the fire pumps have their own generators.

@berkeman makes a good point about not rushing to conclusions.
And I doubt we are talking about one district. There may be many examples of failures for many reasons.
 
berkeman said:
I can say from personal experience that when a firefighting engine hooks up to a hydrant in a neighborhood to start pumping water, that the pressure to normal water outlets (like me fighting the neighborhood home fire with a garden hose) tanks to nothing. So it's reasonable that at higher elevations with multiple taps into the water system that the pressure would drop enough to starve those higher hydrants.
Rats, I just saw a FF chief interviewed tonight on the "ABC World New Tonight" TV broadcast that said another contributing factor was apartment buildings and businesses in the area with sprinkler systems that had those systems compromised by the intensity of the fire, which resulted in large leaks at each of those sites.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
And I doubt we are talking about one district. There may be many examples of failures for many reasons.
Topology is the central key since it explains Santa Ana and windspeed. But the hair dryer effect sounded reasonable to me. South California is dry compared to other regions in any case. The flying sparks are a problem if they land in an urban area whether there was rain in October or not.
 
"The part needed to repair the damaged CL-415 aircraft assisting in the firefighting efforts in Los Angeles is on its way. De Havilland Canada remains on standby 24/7 to support crews and keep the fleet flying."

473168484_1132214982244902_5354623958094954460_n.jpg

Posted just an hour ago over on Facebook. If that's the most complex part needed to make the repair, then the goal of being airborne on Monday will be doable, imo. With a little luck, maybe even Sunday.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
This is looking like a potential catastrophe. Right now the fire is only about five miles from Santa Monica (a major city) and wind gusts as high as 80 mph are expected. This is being driven by the Santa Ana Winds, which are notorious for creating extremely dangerous fire conditions with hot, dry winds that often reach as much as 100 mph.

Parts of Santa Monica are now being evacuated.

View attachment 355499
https://www.latimes.com/california/live/pacific-palisades-fire-updates-los-angeles
Absolutely terrifying for all involved. When I compare the area of just one of the fires to where I live, all of metropolitan Detroit would be gon we.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970 and Ivan Seeking
hypatia said:
Absolutely terrifying for all involved. When I compare the area of just one of the fires to where I live, all of metropolitan Detroit would be gon we.
Hello Hypatia! Very long time no see. :)

The scale of this is going to take time to sink in. Insurance CEOs are probably having heart attacks.
 

Similar threads

Schools Does Santa Monica College offer Electrical Engineering major?
  • Nerd10
  • · Replies 9 ·
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
9