Station Fire plume timelapse, August 29, 2009

The La Canada Station Fire's smoke plume is visible all over southern California. Here you can watch it literally explode into a pyrocumulous cloud in the second shot. These two timelapse shots were captured via digital camera and are presented around 75x actual speed (a little over a minute of actual time per second of viewing). The mushroom cloud effect is amazing evidence of the fire's power. Also amazing is how fast the plume moves, even when viewed from many, many miles away.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Station Fire
• La Canada
• California
• forest fire
• smoke plume
• time lapse photography
• Angeles National Forest
• pyrocumulous

[uncleemph]

Is this fire called a "station fire" for a reason or is it the ignorant media again picking up on a new way to say things and then beating it to death like "on the ground" Pleas someone explain station fire. Was there a station there or?

[DrBillsMovies]

Please look at my earlier comments, already answered

[MADDOG6400]

Umm it's in Southern California. Not Canada.

[DesertOrcaLover]

It's been smoky here in Las Vegas too. Good luck to the fire fighters.

[deoine0lynches]

Yeah, according the the news it has new origins. But it seemed like a natural cause since it's that time of the month again.

[DrBillsMovies]

For the record, this is now officially a fire of "suspicious origin" (= arson) and a homicide investigation.

[thejonesfather]

Great video..

I was on the front lines

during this ty

please check out my vids

[kimmer6]

Music? How about Ramstein's 'Firefight'.

I remember the Angeles Crest fire in 1959 in the same area. It scared me to death and came very close to our house on Day St in Tujunga. As kids, we hiked to the top of Mt. Lukens in the vid many times. I feel sorry for the people who lost homes and would like to waterboard the losers who started this fire.

[1kayakbruce]

Thank you to all the firefighters

[uncleemph]

Reasonable explanation. I do live in another part of the country. My thought is though these reporters act like it every fire has always been called a "station fire"

[DrBillsMovies]

Here's another thought. Wildfires are a typical problem here. Many of them never grow to a large size, but many of them are "named" so we can keep track of them. Once they're huge, the name rarely reflects the location/nature of it any longer.

Even the Northridge earthquake of '94 is mis-named. The tremblor actually happened in Reseda, but Northridge stuck because it's better known. Oops... maybe THAT was the media's fault. ;-)

[DrBillsMovies]

Yes, I see your point that the name of the fire doesn't mean a lot. I also agree that there are serious problems with the media.  However, I think you would be in error to pin the oddness of the name on them. These natural disasters are typically named by the agency who initially responds to the problem, which in this case would have either been the LA County Fire Department or the US Forest Service. Perhaps you live in another part of the country... we kind of get used to these odd names.

[uncleemph]

Sincere thanks for answering the question DR Bill. So now when a fire is started next to a pool it is a pool fire or if it is started next to a latrine it is a latrine fire. Doesn't what I said at the outset make sense? Why doesn't people question "station fire" Why is it the media grabs on something and creates a "station fire" ? Why isn't it a fire or a forest fire? What mindless dribble. Station fire! Road fire. Park fire. Camp fire. Do you see the point people. The media are like parrots