All the necessary provisos are life safety issues. What you posted is not only illegal but very dangerous even with a looming fire storm of the century.
Originally Posted by ballvalve
I suspect you would do the same thing if the 100 year fire was coming up your canyon. No stupidity involved.No common sense tells me that if a fire of the century is booming down on me to get the hell out of there and not spend no time trying to fuel the tank of a generator.
You would let your house burn down Without giving it a fight? Does not sound like a Rock of the Marne type of attitude.
Every person that evacuated lost all their property. The few that had a can do attitude all survived nicely and saved their houses.
Most wildfires give warning, and the bright ones already had the genset fueled and oiled and exercised during the summer. And a jumper designed to [tecnique edited out beforehand] get power to any circuit needed one at a time.
Australia has studied these fires carefully and have decided on a system of encouraging people to stay with their houses in a wildfire, if they are able bodied and have some form of safe spot to retire to. Most houses have the needed clearance by law, so a one handed cripple with a hose only need wet the roof if flammable and put out ember started spot fires, and move junk away from the house to make the difference between success and catastrophe. The people that die in wildfires are typically the ones that leave at the LAST moment, and get stuck in a car. So either stay put or run EARLY.
I built in a 1" 100' radius rainbird on my roof, and a direct assault on the stucco house with a flamethrower would have had no effect. But it needed a genset and a wire.
Maybe you saw me and a friend on FOX national news. Shots of the sprinkler, generator half ass wired up, and a smoldering mass of destroyed homes and lives all around us. And like you, FOX made a big statement at the end of this magic story "DO NOT TRY THIS YOURSELF!"
If you don't delete this I'll edit in a photo later.