AP labels the 2012 Colorado wildfires worst in state history in this story.
My friend and fellow climate skeptic, nationally syndicated radio host Lars Larson, asks some pointed and pertinent questions about what appears to be some of the most idiotic policy ever devised by government. Since we’ve been covering some of the folly of trying to link the fire to global warming, I thought this government folly with trying to put it out would go along with the issues discussed here. – Anthony
He writes in an email to me from Friday:
I have new questions rolling around in my head every day but there are at least four things I know for sure this morning. This year the U.S. Forest Aervice will spend north of a billion dollars fighting forest fires across America. Billions of dollars worth of trees owned by the American people will go up in flames. And a $50 million dollar airplane that could put those fires out faster sits on the ground in Arizona because the U.S. Forest Service refuses to hire Evergreen Aviation. Now you may be saying, “There must be a good reason”. That’s what I thought, but then I remembered that government is capable of multibillion dollar stupidity on a daily basis. The Forest Service offers no explanation whatsoever.
And evergreen aviation points out that their 747 supertanker fire fighting plane has been hired by Mexico and Israel to fight fires and earned high marks. It drops ten times as much water as the biggest forest service tanker in use…and does it at half the cost per gallon. It’s big enough and fast enough to cover fires anywhere in America…and the forest service refuses to use it…and it’s your forests that are going up in flames.
Today’s statement from Evergreen Aviation about why the U.S. Forest service refuses to use its 747 flying supertanker firefighting plane.
http://www.evergreenaviation.com/pdf/Supertanker_Statement_062912.pdf
==========================================================
Date: 6/29/12
Evergreen International Aviation Statement Concerning the Supertanker
We felt compelled to release this statement due to the overwhelming amount of calls we have received concerning the availability of the Evergreen Supertanker. We at Evergreen are saddened by the fire devastation now taking place in many Western US states. For over 60 years, we have supported the US Forest Service in its important mission to battle and control fires, and it is our desire to continue this rich history of service. While our helicopters continue to work fires for the State of Alaska under State contracts, unfortunately, our Boeing 747 Supertanker Very Large Air Tanker (VLAT) aircraft awaits activation with the US Forest Service.
We have never been told why we have not been activated by the US Forest Service, so we can only speculate as to why we face this outcome:
1. We were offered a Call-When-Needed (CWN) contract a few years ago by the US Forest
Service (proving our technical viability), but we were never called into action resulting in
a multi-million dollar loss to our company as we were required to maintain and have
flight crew available should we be called. The only contract that will sustain a VLAT
program is an Exclusive-Use contract, which provides an income stream to sustain the
program even if the asset is not utilized. We invested over $50M to develop this asset in
the firm belief that we could better control fires as we proved in Israel and Mexico under
CWN contracts that we could afford to offer at the time.
2. There have been recent changes to the US Forest Service procurement policies. Today,
only small businesses are eligible for contract awards concerning air tanker assets;
Evergreen is not a small business and, therefore, is excluded from consideration for any
award.
3. The US Forest Service’s specification for Next Generation Air Tanker aircraft limits tank
size to 5,000 gallons. The Supertanker’s tanks hold about 20,000 gallons, which is
considered outside the USFS specification. The USFS just awarded contracts to four
small businesses with aircraft equipped with these smaller tanks, and excluded the
Evergreen Supertanker. Since World War II, tank capacities have been in the 3,000 to
5,000 gallon range, yet we continue to face the growing threat from mega fires today. We
believe the Supertanker represents an overwhelming response to this growing threat.
Please contact your state representatives in Washington DC to demand an examination of their current procurement policies concerning VLAT aircraft. The US Forest Service says it best: “Only YOU can prevent wildfires.”
==============================================================
Here’s Lars Friday interview with Evergreens VP:
Here’s Lars interview with Evergreen three weeks ago:
Here are videos of tanker that could be fighting fires in Colorado and elsewhere…that have killed Americans, burned houses, destroyed public property and timber
Where’s the President?
Check out my new page and “like” me at The Lars Larson Show
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Unfortunately there’s silly conspiracy theory posts herein, I suspect the problem is as Evergreen states re small business preference plus bureaucratic rigidity on cost-effectiveness in normal fires (as I’ve pointed to), and perhaps other politics. IIRC one area in California paid the Mars to be on standby in a nearby lake one summer. The shortage of tankers was predicted: http://www.rotor.com/Publications/RotorNewssupregsup/tabid/177/mid/1237/newsid1237/75012/Default.aspx. However, note that there has been extreme concern about safety of some of the old tankers including the P2Vs and the old Hercs. (One Herc fell out of the air due wing breakage from undetected cracking. I presume the NG’s Hercs are much newer.)
Recognize as well that the customer may avoid or terminate based on trust or failure to perform – an issue that arose when the accident investigation revealed that Carson had mis-represented the payload of their S-61s (whether deliberate or incompetent, they weren’t fulfilling their contract). USFS should have that flexibility, otherwise the job won’t be done as well and taxpayers aren’t getting value for their money. It is difficult to provide details publicly, in the Carson case the accident investigators eventually did and it was “not pretty”.
As far as Evergreen’s operations, they have been broad, perhaps some spook stuff with C212s, probably a lot of routine freight hauling for the US military. Rather rough and ready, had some jerks in engineering in the 1990s so I’d be wary of them, but I expect there is lots of experience and capability in the company (needs solid leadership to apply it).
Solution two: Bring back the loggers.
They used to have open fire wood collection areas, that anyone could go and fill up a pickup truck or trailer with fire wood for free. It was sort of a voluntary thinning system where people who had fireplaces and wood burning stoves could get free firewood for the effort involved in gathering it from the designated fire wood areas. They also used to allow public Christmas tree harvesting in certain areas.
I imagine both of them fell victim to commercial interests who were losing money by the public gathering their own firewood / Christmas trees.
The advent of strict regulations on wood burning (no burn days) and requirements for catalytic systems on wood stoves to limit smoke production for winter air quality reasons has greatly diminished natural wood burning in the metro areas.
I don’t recall either option being offered in the last few years but frankly have not actively looked for the information either since I moved out of the mountains and no longer have friends with wood stoves or fire places who were inclined to invite me along for a wood cutting party.
Larry
@ur momisugly Larry Ledwick (hotrod) on July 2, 2012 at 1:29 pm:
Here in Pennsylvania I’ve been assaulted for some years with public service announcements about the emerald ash borer beetle, “Don’t move firewood”, use it where you get it, don’t take unused wood home from your campsite, etc. (Not bringing wood from home to your campsite is implied.)
It wouldn’t be surprising if those free wood and trees programs were stopped to prevent the spread of infestations, from beetles and bugs to fungi.
How necessary such precautions are in a certain region is another discussion. The adopting of a “one size fits all” policy for the entire nation would also not be surprising.
Keith Sketchley says:
July 2, 2012 at 11:58 am
However, note that there has been extreme concern about safety of some of the old tankers including the P2Vs and the old Hercs. (One Herc fell out of the air due wing breakage from undetected cracking. I presume the NG’s Hercs are much newer.)
The C-130H that crashed was manufactured in ’92 — actual aircraft age has little bearing on metal fatigue, it’s the accumulation of recurring stress on the structural components.
Permits still avail for fuelwood and xmas trees:
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/psicc/passes-permits/forestproducts/?cid=fsm9_032544
More info on the MAFFS air tanker crash
Sadly, this reports 4 of 6 on board perished. Please take a moment to appreciate the sacrifice these airmen made.
This aircraft had just cycled out of Colorado Springs where it helped get the Waldo fire under control.
The story indicated the “lead” plane experienced a severe downdraft approaching the drop zone, with the C-130 following.
Also from the excellent http://www.wildfiretoday.com site:
video avail here
Very sad news indeed. With the combination of altitude, high winds, smoke, low level, high stress flying heavy traffic, radio chatter and fire induced turbulence, it is a testament to the skill, bravery and training of the air crews that crashes are not more frequent.
“Today, only small businesses are eligible for contract awards concerning air tanker assets”
This is not accurate. I am a government contracting officer and there is certainly not a prohibition on using large businesses.
Perhaps a better wording would be ‘today small and minority owned businesses have a significant advantage regarding government contracts’
As to risks of fighting fires, examples include crashes of a CV-580 (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2010/a10p0244/a10p0244.pdf), and an Electra (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2003/a03p0194/a03p0194.asp. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/summary/aar1006.html summary and
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/AAR1006.pdf report cover the Carson S-61 crash in northern California it was picking up firefighters – Carson botched helicopter weight records and the crew failed to adjust their performance expectations for the higher weight after refuelling.
My take is that the flight crew have to be very disciplined – make sure they accurately understand the route the spotter gives them, obtain and maintain excellent situational awareness on the fly, and “fly the numbers” (hold proper speeds). (In one crash in Canada the pilots did not turn down the valley as planned by the spotter, instead turned the other way into rising terrain (it is difficult to judge terrain visually). I understand the first Mars was lost because the crew flew into rising terrain.)
Operating big aircraft economically and safely, whether piston or turbine-powered, takes dedication and expertise. Knowing how to baby those big radials, inspect structure, and deal with aerodynamic and engine response are key factors. (The turbofans prior to computer control, such as on old 747s and DC-10s, are slow to respond to the throttle whereas the CV580, Electra, and Herc are quick due to their constant speed single-shaft engine design.) Even keeping track of aircraft weight challenged some people at Carson.
Bill Tuttle:
Which C-130 are you talking of?
I spoke of the one that had a wing or two break a few years ago – a privately operated one, not the National Guard one that crashed on July 1, 2012.
While technically it is possible to keep old aircraft going well, it can be very difficult to do so. The civilian Herc that came out of the air a few decades ago in the SE US, the Herc fire tanker a few years ago, and the Chalks amphib a few years ago illustrate the difficulty. All due undetected fatigue cracking, IIRC two of them in locations difficult to inspect.
Corrosion is a risk that does increase with age, varying greatly with environment. SE US more risky than cold dry climates, for example. Sea coasts are a factor, and in humid places like middle Africa microbes grow in jet fuel and cause corrosion of wing structure.
As I say in the post I just made about safety, it takes dedication and expertise. In the 1970s Lockheed-Georgia’s support was good (especially after the Herc fell out of the air in the SE US), I expect it is today.
There are aging aircraft programs – I don’t know how the Herc wing-fold a few years ago related to them. I know the Mars had an engineering evaluation done several years ago, by people I have confidence in.
Fire tankers often have the scheduling advantage of of an off season during which intensive inspections and repairs can be done, but the operator has to spend the money and have or contract the expertise..
Bill Tuttle:
Here is a mention of what probably is the Herc wing-fold crash several years ago: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/489436-c-130-maffs-air-tanker-goes-down-south-dakota.html
“The other C130 lost was a very early ex USAF airplane which had been operated by the CIA and for a long period had no docuemented repair and service records.
Both wings detached from the centre section caused by joint failure.”
Not saying that person is accurate in all respects.
You should be able to find the accident report at http://www.ntsb.gov, but the search UI takes fiddling.
According to an April 23, 2004 letter from the NTSB to the FAA and government departments responsible for fighting forest fires, there were two cases of inflight failure of C-130A wings while fighting forest fires:
On August 13, 1994 one crashed near Pearblossom CA, registered as N135FF. It was delivered to USAF in December 1957. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19940813-1 (some early confusion as to cause – fuel tank ignition but actually structural fatigue)
On June 17, 2002 one crashed near Walker CA, registered as N130HP. It was delivered to USAF in December 1957. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20020617-0 and http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2004/Apr-24-Sat-2004/news/23730288.html.
On July 18, 2002, a Consolidated Vultee P4Y Privateer, N7620C, was lost due to wing failure while fighting a forest fire near Estes Park CO. (I incorrectly referred to P2V Neptune, a 2-engined airplane, which Wikipedia says have a service life of 15,000 hours.) http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20020718-0
Some history of the 2002 crashes and subsequent actions at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_airtanker_crashes.
All cases were due to undetected fatigue cracking. A complication of inspecting is multiple layers of skin material, so crack initiation could be between the outer layer (often a reinforcement/repair “doubler”) and stringer or spar cap. (I am advised that the the Chalk’s Ocean Airways Grumman G-73T Turbine Mallard that crashed off of Miami had a similar complication. http://www.sae.org/events/pama/jetblast/200701/ has a bit of information on inspection, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2007/AAR0704.pdf is the NTSB report.)
According to the letter, the experienced operator Conair found that firetanker operation of the F27 resulted in a “Damage Rate Factor” 5.7 times that of normal transport operations. I recall that USAF operations of C-130E/Hs were more damaging than civilian operations, due to (for example) training low-level flying and “assault” landings.
It takes about 1 year for the NTSB to produce a final report for any aviation accident, but if you want to see some in depth reports of previous accidents, go here:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/reports_aviation.html
It is all there, no holds barred.