Home Medical Factors Facing Pilots Aviation Stories Of Interest FAA Exam Aviation News Maintenance and Aircraft Mechanics General Aviation Helicopters
Aviation History Legal Issues In Aviation Links To Other Sites Editorials Hot Air Balloon Aviation Training Handbooks Read Online Upcoming Events Editorials


Study Shows U.S. Forest Service Should Consider Mix Of Aircraft To Fight Wildfires
By Eddy Metcalf

July 31, 2012 - The U.S. Forest Service should upgrade its large airborne firefighting fleet to include more amphibious scooper aircraft, with air tankers and helicopters in a supporting role during the initial attack of fires before they become large, according to a new study from the RAND Corporation.

Scoopers and air tankers are large aircraft used to drop large amounts of water or fire retardant on wildfires to assist on-the-ground firefighters in containing fires. Scoopers drop water while air tankers drop retardant.

The Forest Service (an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture) supplies many of the large aircraft used to fight wildland fires on federal and state lands.


"Because scoopers cost less and can make multiple water drops per hour when water sources are nearby, we found that the most cost-effective firefighting fleet for the Forest Service will have more scoopers than air tankers for the prevention of large fires," said Edward G. Keating, lead author of the study and a senior economist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. "However, air tankers are important in an ancillary role in initial attack for the minority of wildfires where water sources are not nearby, and possibly for fighting large fires as well."

The U.S. Forest Service has been trying to determine the best composition of aircraft to replace its aging air fleet for several years. Its fleet includes leased former military air tankers that date back to the 1950s. These older aircraft have been failing, with two fatal crashes in 2002 and two accidents in June 2012, one of which was fatal. Several weeks ago, legislation was finalized allowing the Forest Service to move forward with contracts for seven new tankers.

In 2009, the Forest Service hired RAND to study the composition of a mix of air tankers, scoopers and helicopters that minimized total "social costs," including the costs of wildfires—such as costs associated with destroyed property and fire suppression—and the costs of aircraft. Two prior studies conducted by the Forest Service were deemed insufficient for justifying major acquisitions by the federal Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Agriculture Inspector General.



Wildfire suppression costs have increased dramatically since 2000, currently averaging about $1.65 billion per year. Part of this rise is because residential development has expanded into areas that were previously wilderness, but it also may be a consequence of changes in weather and the accumulation of burnable wood and grasslands created by many years of aggressive wildland fire suppression, experts say.

The RAND study estimates the average social cost of a large wildfire at $3.3 million. Half of the fires cost less than $1 million and 10 percent cost more than $10 million. Fires near populated areas can be vastly more costly than fires in isolated regions. Large aircraft can help prevent these expensive large fires, easily justifying their annual cost if their activities account for the prevention of just a few large fires each year. 

The RAND study focused on 1,500-gallon and 3,000-gallon air tankers, 1,600-gallon scoopers, and 1,200-gallon and 2,700-gallon helicopters. The Forest Service asked RAND not to include very large air tankers, like converted 747s or DC-10s, which can carry tens of thousands of gallons of retardant. The study also excluded smaller aircraft that carry fewer than 1,000 gallons of water or retardant. 

Historically, the Forest Service's fleet of large firefighting aircraft has been composed primarily of air tankers and helicopters. Air tankers primarily carry fire retardant, which has advantages over water, but is also much more costly. There also are environmental concerns about the retardant. The key advantage of air tankers is their ability to support firefighting operations that may be far from the water sources needed by scoopers and helicopters. 

Scoopers can be used in areas where there is ready access to large bodies of water. Although current models cannot carry loads as large as air tankers, scoopers can cycle back and forth between bodies of water and a fire, making multiple drops an hour. This compares to about 1.5 drops per hour for an air tanker, which must fly back to a runway and load more retardant before returning to the fire. 

Helicopters also have the advantage of being able to make multiple trips in a short amount of time, and helicopters can make precise water drops. But helicopters have a limited range, fly slower than scoopers or air tankers, are less effective in mountainous areas, and cost more to acquire and maintain than scoopers on a per-gallon-delivered basis. The total annual capital and operating costs per aircraft range from approximately $2.8 million for a 1,600-gallon scooper to $7.1 million for a 3,000-gallon air tanker, before factoring in the cost of fire retardant, Keating said. 

Helicopters can use bodies of water as small as 12 feet in diameter. Scoopers need larger bodies of water, generally ranging from a quarter of a mile to eight-tenths of a mile in length, depending on obstacles adjacent to the water. RAND researchers found that at least two-thirds of the fires studied have been within 10 miles of a body of water that appeared to meet scoopers' requirements, and about 80 percent of fires have been within five miles of water bodies that would accommodate helicopters. 

The RAND report was delayed twice because the Forest Service and RAND agreed to develop a second analysis drawing on a Forest Service analytical tool called the Fire Program Analysis (FPA) system. As a result, the RAND study developed two separate, but complementary, simulation models to evaluate the effectiveness of fleet mix options. One is simpler and allows for better evaluation of the influence of model assumptions, while the other rests on Forest Service assumptions built into Fire Program Analysis system. "While the two models yielded different estimates of optimal fleets, both approaches suggested a predominant role for scoopers," Keating said. Another finding of the study was the importance of efficient prepositioning of aircraft to meet the next day's firefighting needs and what the researchers termed "dispatch prescience." 

When aircraft can be correctly and flexibly prepositioned, fewer are needed. Further, if aircraft dispatch can be optimized—that is, when they can be sent to just those fires where they make the difference between having a large fire or not—fewer aircraft would be needed. The Forest Service could dramatically reduce its aviation costs if it could increase dispatch prescience and prepositioning accuracy. "We think there may be an opportunity for the Forest Service to improve its aircraft location and dispatch algorithms, and possibly reduce aviation costs considerably," Keating said. 

The study does not recommend a specific number of aircraft, but provides a framework for the Forest Service to rebuild its fleet. Variables include how many days the aircraft would spend at particular base locations, the value of preventing certain fires and how accurately dispatchers can determine what kind of fire the Forest Service is facing. The range of solutions is on the order of 15 to 30 scoopers to be used in conjunction with two to six air tankers and a comparable number of 2,700-gallon helicopters. The study, "Air Attack Against Wildfires: Understanding U.S. Forest Service Requirements for Large Aircraft," can be found at www.rand.org. Other authors of the study are Andrew Morral, Carter Price, Dulani Woods, Daniel Norton, Christina Panis, Evan Saltzman and Ricardo Sanchez. 

U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) introduced bipartisan legislation known as the Wildfire Suppression Aircraft Transfer Act of 2012 that would transfer 14 excess C-27J Spartan aircraft from the Department of Defense to the Forest Service to help replenish the agency’s aging airtanker fleet.  The Alenia C-27J Spartan is a medium-sized military transport aircraft. The C-27J is an advanced derivative of Alenia Aeronautica's G.222 (C-27A Spartan in U.S. service), with the engines and systems of the Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules. The aircraft was selected as the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) for the U.S. military. 

The United States Air Force plans to scrap the aircraft under its Fiscal Year 2013 Force Reduction Plan, but the Forest Service says the C-27J Spartan would become a vital component of its overall airtanker modernization strategy. These aircraft would provide a modern, flexible, and extremely efficient Type 2 platform specifically designed to operate in challenging conditions.  “The Forest Service needs to modernize its entire airtanker fleet,” said Senator John McCain. “We have an opportunity to take the C-27J, an aircraft the Pentagon no longer wants, and give it to the Forest Service to enhance aircraft safety and lower existing maintenance costs. The C-27J should be kept in the service of the American people to help our brave fire crews, rather than sit in an airplane boneyard.”  

Unlike past proposals that directed the transfer of excess military aircraft to private firefighting contractors, the legislation introduced by Senator McCain keeps the aircraft under Forest Service ownership and dedicates them solely to fighting wildfires.  The bill would also reauthorize a law that expired in 2005 that lets the Department of Defense sell surplus aircraft parts to private companies that perform maintenance on Forest Service aircraft.   

The C-27J's duties are to be taken by the U.S. Air Force's C-130s. In February 2012, Alenia warned that it would not provide support for C-27Js resold by the United States. In March 2012, it was reported that the U.S. Coast Guard is considering taking over the aircraft from the U.S. Air Force. On 23 March 2012, the U.S. Air Force announced that it will cut the C-27J from its inventory in fiscal year 2013 after determining that its per-aircraft lifecycle costs are higher than those of C-130 aircraft performing the same combat resupply mission. As of April 2012, the USAF is continuing to shut down the program, in anticipation that Congress will support its budget request to do so. In July 2012 the entire fleet was grounded due to a flight control system failure.

Other News Stories (For the latest news please checkout our home page)
blog comments powered by Disqus  
Home Aviation News Aviation Stories Of Interest FAA Exam Upcoming Events Links To Other Sites General Aviation Helicopters Medical Factors Facing Pilots
Maintenance and Aircraft Mechanics Hot Air Balloon Aviation Training Handbooks Read Online Aviation History Legal Issues In Aviation Sea Planes Editorials
 ©AvStop Online Magazine                                                                 Contact Us                                                  Return To News                                          Bookmark and Share

AvStop Aviation News and Resource Online Magazine