From Airlines to Firebombing - Really?

[spektrum]

https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/overhaul-ad-hoc-aerial-firefighting-system-pilots-20200914-p55vgq

Which one is it? Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

[ACMS]

https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/overhaul-ad-hoc-aerial-firefighting-system-pilots-20200914-p55vgq

Which one is it? Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

So highly experienced Pilots can’t apply then? Only X Fighter Pilots, Bomber Pilots and Space shuttle Pilots?

What about X Air Force One Pilots, would they have the required experience for you?

oh ok.

it’s not like the current Fire Bombing Pilots have never made a mistake is it......

No it’s more like you think we’d be coming in and taking someone else’s ( your? ) job? Is that it?

[neville_nobody]

You cannot put anyone in aviation in a box. Airline pilots come from all parts of aviation and people have some pretty amazing experience. Test Pilots, Fighter Pilots, Survey Pilots, SAR, RFDS etc etc

It would be much quicker to start with to hire a current 737 pilot to fly a 737 water bomber than anyone from GA regardless of experience.

[Beamr]

Couldn't read beyond the paywall, but what is the availability of larger firebombers, especially if the goal is to have australian registered fleet with local crews? The article begins with stating the existence of choppers and smaller ac and lack of larger ac. Even though there are pilots available (I am not taking any opinion on the firebombing readiness), is there anything to fly for 20/21 season? I would imagine it would take too long to convert freighters/airliners for the job to make the season.

[bringbackthe80s]

https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/overhaul-ad-hoc-aerial-firefighting-system-pilots-20200914-p55vgq

Which one is it? Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

It depends on the person And their background, most don’t. Some will for sure.

[currawong]

The assumption being there will be any work.

Hard to envisage after last seasons catch up in hazard reduction...

[Squawk7700]

The assumption being there will be any work.

Hard to envisage after last seasons catch up in hazard reduction...

As big as it was it was a drop in the ocean!

[Sunfish]

Squawk is right. Plenty more inflammable real estate. We did our mandatory burn over training exercises today. Mr. Summer will be with us sooner than we think.

[dr dre]

Which one is it? Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

I guess all airline pilots are just button pushing, autopilot babysitting children of the magenta huh? Not “real” pilots? Couldn’t possibly be tasked, with some additional training, to operate the aircraft they have probably 1000’s of hours on in a different role huh?

Aircraft types used in the National Aerial Firefighting Fleet include RJ85, 737, King Airs and Learjets for scanning. Q400s and 747s have been used overseas. No doubt there’d be endorsed Australian pilots on the above types who are currently stood down. Some training required for the task yes, but less I’d imagine than taking a current bomber pilot on an Air Tractor and training them to fly a 747. You’ve got ready to go people with plenty of time on type ready and willing to crew a service we need in this country. The AFAP head is quite right.

[Capt Fathom]

Some people like to think what they do is unique! No one could possibly do what I do.
Aviation is all encompassing. Once you have your head around the basics and gain some experience,
there are many paths available to you.
It’s not that hard, and most readily adapt to the different opportunities.

[junior.VH-LFA]

A very highly experienced (both time on type and exposure to fire bombing operations) crew lost their lives this season in a well maintained and capable aircraft. You’d be hard pressed to find a better crew/aircraft combination in the world.

And you think it’ll be “minimal” training.

Sure.

[Spooky 2]

I have known several former USN P3 pilots that transitioned from their age 60 airline jobs over to fire fighting spectrum. Not aware of any issues, but then I was not in the cockpit with them.

[Squawk7700]

A very highly experienced (both time on type and exposure to fire bombing operations) crew lost their lives this season in a well maintained and capable aircraft. You’d be hard pressed to find a better crew/aircraft combination in the world.

And you think it’ll be “minimal” training.

Sure.

It’s very easy to bring that up as a throw-away line to harden a point of view and if anyone were to post back right now with what truly happened (before the report was released) there would be a barrage of comment world wide.

The best way to summarise this tragedy and how it is at all relevant to this discussion, would be to say... do you ever see airline crew tasked to fly from Melbourne to Sydney, performing a flyby of the Canberra tower on the way past?

[lucille]

Why does an airline pilot need to have a skillet to do firebombing? Do they also have to cook breakfast?

[dr dre]

A very highly experienced (both time on type and exposure to fire bombing operations) crew lost their lives this season in a well maintained and capable aircraft. You’d be hard pressed to find a better crew/aircraft combination in the world.

And you think it’ll be “minimal” training.

Sure.

No not “minimal”, additional training to the required standard. They’ve already got the experience on type. All it takes is CASA to amend the rules which currently make it the domain of former ag pilots. Maybe there is resistance from some in that community who want it to remain a closed shop

Interestingly helicopter firefighting pilots are not required to have former aerial application (ag) experience before gaining a firefighting endorsement as far as I can see.

You’ve got probably a thousand pilots who are currently not working in this country who would be up to the task of being able to be trained for this service if the Federal Government and CASA got on board. I don’t see why anyone posting on this site wouldn’t want to kill two birds with one stone (provide Australia with this essential service and provide employment for many of our stood down colleagues). It does seem there is some sneering going on at “autopilot babysitting” airline pilots who possibly couldn’t do anything more than watch an autopilot from 10 seconds after take off to ten seconds before landing.

[junior.VH-LFA]

No not “minimal”, additional training to the required standard. They’ve already got the experience on type. All it takes is CASA to amend the rules which currently make it the domain of former ag pilots. Maybe there is resistance from some in that community who want it to remain a closed shop

Interestingly helicopter firefighting pilots are not required to have former aerial application (ag) experience before gaining a firefighting endorsement as far as I can see.

You’ve got probably a thousand pilots who are currently not working in this country who would be up to the task of being able to be trained for this service if the Federal Government and CASA got on board. I don’t see why anyone posting on this site wouldn’t want to kill two birds with one stone (provide Australia with this essential service and provide employment for many of our stood down colleagues). It does seem there is some sneering going on at “autopilot babysitting” airline pilots who possibly couldn’t do anything more than watch an autopilot from 10 seconds after take off to ten seconds before landing.

I agree with you fully, with the right training it could be done. The article though indicated it would be minimal training, which just wouldn’t be true. I’m not an Ag pilot, but I know many and to operate in that environment at low level is demanding, add a heap of other aeroplanes, **** house vis and usually large amounts of heat and you suddenly have a very different experience than what is usual for an airline crew.

Of course people can be trained, and I’m sure if anyone wanted to do it full time for the rest of their careers (or for an extended stint), you could go out and grab it. A casual gig for a season while covid (terribly) has ****** over the aviation sector? Not realistic IMHO. You’d spend most of the season being a training burden, and hopefully (because as you’ve suggested, what we ALL want is a return to normality for aviation as a whole) back at an airline within a year or two. There are people in airline with previous relevant experience that might be easier to train, so there isn’t a one size fits all answer.

I think the comment that would (has) rubbed people in the wrong way in that line of work the wrong way potentially is “minimal training.” With thousands of hours on type, of course with suitable training you could make it work, airline pilots aren’t just button pushers (that should be obvious to anyone). But it wouldn’t be a two week course and a check to line!

It’s also really a pointless discussion to have, the positions are filled by the contractor. There aren’t any vacant seats available.

[ad-astra]

It's interesting that all of the replies so far (including my own) reflect no actual firefighting experience.
Given that it is a foreign company flying a N registered aircraft I would think that the first plan of action for any aspiring aerial firefighter would be to ensure they have the required license suitable to the employer, the required endorsement for low level ops suitable to the employer and put in an application to the employer.
Declaring that "this is my country and I am entitled to a job regardless of real time experience or license's" made me more than a little uncomfortable when I read it in the Sunday Mail this morning.
Unemployment does not give you priority on the list of most suitable candidates.
I am pretty sure that the pilots who have been firefighting safely for years would take this attitude as a slight on their training and professionalism.

[WhatsaLizad?]

I think most of the lot on this thread and lurking would have to demonstrate the ability to fly a simple VFR pattern after a runway change and a constant rate of descent to landing without gyrations with creating magenta line final with the FMS and without Flight Director and autothrottles.

I see the wreckage created by today's training at my US Legacy Carrier in the Sim and in real life when it comes to anything outside the magenta line with a Flight Director and autothrottles. To say there is a possible transfer of skills is near laughable.

P3 pilots were mentioned. Those guys were used to flying a couple hundred feet above the ocean with 2 engines shut down in a airplane that probably had half of it's equipment inop or screwed up..

[dr dre]

It’s also really a pointless discussion to have, the positions are filled by the contractor. There aren’t any vacant seats available.

I think the whole point of AFAP’s position (which is in common with what many emergency services groups are saying) is in the long term last summer will become the norm not an exception. Fire seasons are overlapping with the northern hemisphere so we can’t rely on them to provide the bulk of the larger aircraft. It’s time to combine Australia’s firefighting and aviation expertise to create our own national aerial firefighting service, and not rely on northern hemisphere contractors. Jobs for Aussies and all that. Australian registered aircraft, Australian pilots, we control them.

Now the currently stood down pilots may be able to be used in later seasons if they choose so, but more firefighting pilots definitely be needed in the future. Don’t think for one second that last summer was an anomaly. It’s a threat this country is going to face for the majority of future years, we have a lot of money and resources spent on services to drop real bombs on threats that have very rarely been employed over time, whereas bushfires will threaten this country every 5/6 months for most years into the future, yet we seem to want to a bare minimum effort with overseas contractors. Doesn’t make sense?

[ACMS]

Boy there’s some crap in here.......most Pilots experienced on type with thousands of hours in the Aircraft and the Sim would have very little difficulty learning to drop fire retardant AFTER a suitable amount of training on the ground and air and appropriate testing.....
Sure, not all would be suitable at it but most would have the ability to adapt and survive in what is a hostile environment for sure....

Obviously they should be rostered as FO for a while with an experienced CN to learn the ropes, I’m not suggesting we stick 2 newbie Airline Pilots together...!!

So some here are saying that 10,000 hours experience ( sometimes even on type ) counts for nothing? Really?

[John Eacott]

I’ve had about 20 years of fire ops in east coast states, starting back in the late 80s when we learned On The Job, so there’s a little bit of experience to refer to.

We all have to start somewhere and there have been numerous missed opportunities for a solid home owned and operated aerial firefighting to be set up and nurtured. Time and again the cheap and easy choice has been made by officials to engage overseas operators rather than nurture ‘our own’ and keep the money and experience here in Australia. We missed out on setting up our own S-64 Aircrane fleet back in the late 90s, and have spent more since on bringing in N Reg machines than we would ever have outlaid on a fleet of new machines (as did the Italians). Operators such as Kestrel have battled hard to get night ops up and approved, forever slowed down by the CASA and achieved so much despite the obstacles put in their way. McDermotts have a great setup of Helitacks all on P2 or N registrations which allow them to go overseas and Make Money, a virtual impossibility with any VH machine.

So why can’t or won’t we allow Australian pilots to get a foot in the overseas dominated door of LAT and VLAT ops? Why should aircraft pilot be an approved occupation for migrants; it certainly wasn’t some 40 years ago? The skill levels must be there, and the requirements certainly in place to meet the demands of the job; helicopter pilots must have ag/low level endorsement to be allowed out on fire ops (Helitack and Firebird) so I’d expect similar requirements for plank drivers to get onto the fireground. Minimum hours are also required (100 last time I looked) so it’s not as if Capt Bloggs is going to jump into a LAT without being thoroughly trained.

And my pet irrit has long been the so-called Free Trade Agreement with the USA, where no-one, not even the Canadians, can operate on their own register on fires in the US. All have to be N Reg.

Yet we roll over and let them into Australia with only a requirement for an Australian AOC, watching a vast amount of money and experience drift away at the expense of every Australian taxpayer.

[John Eacott]

No not “minimal”, additional training to the required standard. They’ve already got the experience on type. All it takes is CASA to amend the rules which currently make it the domain of former ag pilots. Maybe there is resistance from some in that community who want it to remain a closed shop

Interestingly helicopter firefighting pilots are not required to have former aerial application (ag) experience before gaining a firefighting endorsement as far as I can see.

You’ve got probably a thousand pilots who are currently not working in this country who would be up to the task of being able to be trained for this service if the Federal Government and CASA got on board. I don’t see why anyone posting on this site wouldn’t want to kill two birds with one stone (provide Australia with this essential service and provide employment for many of our stood down colleagues). It does seem there is some sneering going on at “autopilot babysitting” airline pilots who possibly couldn’t do anything more than watch an autopilot from 10 seconds after take off to ten seconds before landing.

Quite incorrect; no helicopter pilot is allowed on any Australian fire operation without ag/low level endorsement and minimum hours on type and on fireops.

There is no such thing as a firefighting endorsement.

[dr dre]

There is no such thing as a firefighting endorsement.

CASA 56/18 — Flight Training (Aeroplane Firefighting Endorsement) Approval 2018 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018N00141)

[dr dre]

So why can’t or won’t we allow Australian pilots to get a foot in the overseas dominated door of LAT and VLAT ops?.

Politics, the government doesn’t want to invest in it. They’d rather spend money elsewhere. (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6568613/why-is-shark-one-more-important-than-the-fire-bombers/)

it isn’t just AFAP, emergency service chiefs have been campaigning for more water bombers since before last fire season. (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/former-fire-chief-calls-out-pm-over-refusal-of-meeting/11705330)Looks like their pleas are still falling on deaf ears.

[John Eacott]

CASA 56/18 — Flight Training (Aeroplane Firefighting Endorsement) Approval 2018 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018N00141)

Although I was referencing helicopter ops, you are quite right as there's a similar instrument for rotary drivers. Nonetheless, the requirement for the low level segment of the ag (or mustering) endorsement was always a requirement for helicopter ops; it is now covered in 57/18 Part 5.3.b and Schedule 1.

[Sunfish]

Re: Buying Overseas Vs. Developing our own talents.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. We suffer from the ANU over educated idiots who populate the Canberra bureaucracy. They kill 99.999% of every Australian initiative or innovation all the time. The reason is that what they were taught in Economics 101 about competitive advantage and economics of scale is utter bull**** and has been for at least the last 60 years.

"Competitive advantage" is a term for having some geographic, social or economic advantage over other producers that results in your industry being more efficient and profitable than other peoples. This is often to do with "input costs'.

"Economies of scale" is to do with absorbing the initial investment (referred to as setup costs) in producing something over more units than the next guy. This means a lower unit cost.

The examples quoted in the texts are the American Auto industry - huge economies of scale. The Chicago meat packers grow cattle > rail to chicago > kill and fit into tins > rail to New York.

However these and other examples are sixty years out of date and in a modern context, just plain wrong. For example the entire technology thrust in the auro industry for the last sixty years is to reduce setup costs so that economic order quantity = 1 not 10,000! This is what, among other things, Kanban and CNC machine tools is all about.

Same with competitive advantage - transport costs these days are minimal, the internet has shrunk the planet and the idea for example that our primary products (e.g wool) had to be processed in England is way past its use by date.

So how is this relevant? Simple ANU graduates were taught:

- Australia only has competitive advantage in mining and agriculture, we are a quarry and a farm, period. The downside of this is that we are price takers as our commodities are traded internationally.

- Australia is too small to have economies of scale in manufacturing anything at all. The corollary to this is that any manufactured goods from overseas are always cheaper and better value.

- The deduction from these two outdated principles is that forcing miners and farmers to buy anything local reduces their profitability.

* For these "logical reasons" the Mandarins in Canberra have implacably opposed ANY manufacturing or other initiative in the Australian economy because it might "hurt our farmers or miners".

That is why:

-the Victa airtourer business was allowed to be destroyed.

- The Nomad was scrapped.

- Gippsland Airvan had to be sold.

- Ansett wasnt rescued (we don't have a big enough market for two airlines - economies of scale again).

- Our car industry was closed.

- Etc. You lose count.

But wait! There's more! Not only do the bureaucrats believe all these things and act accordingly, it gets worse!

Should some Australian secondary industry succeed in developing something competitive and thriving, the bureaucrats are enraged and try to kill it because it isn't supposed to be possible! The thinking goes that if Australian xyz company is designing making and selling digital thronomisters around the world, then we must be subsidising them in some way, because this can't happen! Therefore they do what they can to shut them down, starting by the Federal Government ignoring the local product and buying overseas. This is what happened to the RAAF Wamira trainer project (sort of).

So despite Australia being bushfire central there is not a hope in hell that the Australian Government, or any state government is going to support a local capability. The Mandarins in Canberra will tell them its uneconomic and to buy from overseas for the reasons I've elucidated.

Same thing is happening now to the alternative solar energy industry. We should be world leaders, but not if Can'tberra has its way.

[TBM-Legend]

The US large air tanker fleet , apart from some units in California, are owned by companies that bid for contracts with the USFS, CDF and other agencies. The US does not provide funding apart from these contracts. In Canada some states own a few CL215T/415's and the rest are private companies on contracts.

The notion here is that we ask the government/s to pay do everything. Re the AFAP cry, those making the statements that Aussie fires should be fought by Aussie crews and assets simply do not understand the intense training and experience required to operate large air tankers in the fire zone. It takes years to become a Captain for example so thousands of hours peddling a Boeing or Airbus anything speeding between 4/5 star hotels isn't the background for this. These fire guys are more akin to fighter pilots not transport types.

McDermott Helicopters has proven the case for private helicopter fire operations and sends aircraft all over the world to fight fires so we do have capabilities here.

[Al E. Vator]

John Eacott - great to hear from somebody in the business long-term. Good points. Totally agree with Sunfish about or disgraceful lack of support for homegrown enterprises, what's wrong with us? TBM that generalisation about airline pilots is nonsense. As Spooky 2 said, airline pilots over the age of 60 in the US make that transition and we are no different here - depends on the individual. Certainly this airline pilot nearing 60 was bored silly and keen too be involved in something worthwhile for the country. I had written this article for submission to either The Australian of the Fairfax press and haven't submitted it yet. Naive and slightly simplistic perhaps but we need to do something about this firefighting and have the ability to do it from within. Just needs major political support. We have the people and the brains and unfortunately the fires.

.............

Australia must urgently review its aerial firefighting administration.

For years, on a state-by-state basis, amongst a random array of aircraft we have relied on the seasonal importation from the United States of the effective Erickson Aircrane helicopters to fight these fires.

One can never forget the appreciation of a resident whose house was about to be engulfed by flames. Looking up to the heavens he saw ‘Elvis’ emerging from the smoke, dousing the flames, saving his house and possibly his life.

Recently, we have also imported larger, fixed-wing aircraft such as the BAe 146 and Douglas DC-10.

Rather than relying on imported aircraft, the New South Wales government recently acquired a converted Boeing 737 as a dedicated water bomber. Ex-airline aircraft such as the midsize McDonnell Douglas MD-80 and DC-10 or the Boeing 747 very large air tanker are becoming the standard for aerial firefighting. The 747 can carry seventy-two thousand litres of retardant, released in seven partial drops or one massive deployment.

The great benefit of these larger airframes is they are cheaper to acquire than new aircraft and fast. They are able to reach anywhere between Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide in under two hours and within minutes if based locally.

Current firefighting strategy thus firstly involves smaller aircraft such as helicopters and modified crop dusters dropping retardant directly onto the flames. Secondly, the larger tanker aircraft drop a non-combustible line of retardant ahead of an oncoming fire.

This can mean the difference between a town surviving or being engulfed in an inferno.

In North America, aircraft such as the purpose-built Canadiar CL-215 floatplane utilise North America’s massive system of lakes to scoop six thousand litres of water in less than twenty seconds, then dumping this onto nearby fires.

In Australia, that readily available fresh water is unavailable. Our aircraft primarily operate from fixed bases, using tank water or retardant. Salt water can be used with associated operational and environmental restrictions.

Australia currently employs a state by state approach to aerial firefighting, many of the aircraft being charted from commercial operators. Some intra-state liaison of firefighting assets is overseen by the National Aerial Firefighting Centre.

With increasingly widespread fire outbreaks, there will always be the need for private sector involvement. However, with mega events such as these latest blazes and the Black Saturday and Ash Wednesday fires, there is an urgent need to establish a dedicated, RAAF-like, national aerial firefighting authority.

This autonomous department needs its own fleet of helicopters, small and large fixed-wing fire detecting and firebombing aircraft and its own crew and facilities.

These aircraft must be rapidly deployable across the nation and the region.

When not in use in Australia, the fleet can potentially be leased to countries such as Indonesia. International firefighting will unfortunately become a growth industry.

Accompanying this fleet, we need to quickly establish dedicated facilities at airports nationwide. These large and small airstrips must have rapid-refill water and retardant tanks, fully stocked and ready to deploy at any time. This will minimise turnaround times for both the large and small aircraft and maximise deployment efficiency.

Some of this infrastructure is already operational. The smaller single engine tanker aircraft and helicopters already operate from unimproved airstrips nationwide and do an excellent job.

However a concerted effort must be made to establish an integrated system of large paved and smaller unprepared private and public airstrips, with tanking facilities available at short notice, overseen by one national authority.

If the need be, uncooperative local councils should be overridden in the national interest. This is a wartime-like operational necessity and there can be no place for agenda-driven councils.

As bushfires survivors repeatedly state, this is a war.

The aircraft and air bases can be established relatively quickly and affordably. Certainly far more affordably than the emotional and financial human and property costs resulting from not attacking this issue with urgency.

The large tanker aircraft are not new, being retired airliners. Their conversion to tanker status can be undertaken locally, benefiting local industry.

Larger airports need not be constructed from scratch, they already exist. Near Brisbane there is Amberley RAAF airbase and the expanding but under utilised Sunshine Coast domestic airport.

The Sydney basin is slightly more problematic, having recently seen the closure of smaller airfields such as Hoxton Park and Schofields. Only the RAAF bases at Richmond and Williamstown and potentially the smaller airport at Albion Park near Wollongong have runways of sufficient length. Now is the perfect time to plan for a dedicated facility at the new Western Sydney Airport.

Melbourne has Avalon Airport to the south and Mangalore to the north.

With fires becoming more destructive each season, communities near these airports will appreciate that they have a facility able to defend their houses, businesses and lives from devastation.

Blame for the cause of the fires is a long-term game. We do not have the luxury of time.

Establishing a centralised, well equipped, rapid response aerial firefighting team, free from political partisanship is the fastest way to defend ourselves from these awful fires.

[dr dre]

The notion here is that we ask the government/s to pay do everything. Re the AFAP cry, those making the statements that Aussie fires should be fought by Aussie crews and assets simply do not understand the intense training and experience required to operate large air tankers in the fire zone.

There’s nothing stopping our current government from starting to develop that skill set and operational knowledge base now. We’ve had public run or government contracted services like Coastwatch, Maritime Search and Rescue, Police Air Wing, military etc in this country, and it wouldn’t be beyond the realm of possibility for a National Aerial Firefighting Service to be created, either fully government run or a private contractor supplying Australian aircraft and crew under Australian Government control, and brought up to operational standards within a period of time (drawing on the knowledge base of local and overseas experts).

With Northern Hemisphere Fire seasons extending as late as December (https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-us-australia-firefighting-aircraft-climate-change/) and Australian bushfire seasons now starting as early as August (https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/it-s-still-winter-but-parts-of-nsw-are-now-officially-in-bushfire-season-20190801-p52cum.html) the use of foreign assets can’t be sustained long term. Yes it’ll take a few years to get it up and running but it isn’t like this problem is going to go away. It just takes some political will to get it started, which doesn’t exist at the moment.

[John Eacott]

Al E. Vator thanks for the comment, but I don't claim to be completely up-to-date as I've already demonstrated!

A couple of points; the troops at the frontline were expressing concerns about reaction times and about overseas machines in the 90s, so for 'leaders' to come along with almost grandstanding attacks asking for the same some 20+ years later, impresses no-one except the professionally outraged.

What we need IMO is not necessarily a Government operation but Government support for home grown industries. We should be denying N reg operators access to our contracts until they allow VH reg access to theirs, as should be the case with our Free Trade Agreement. The major operators would soon scream to their Congressmen, etc, when a significant revenue source is threatened. McDermott are a prime example of an Australian operator doing well, but only with all machines N Reg for use in the States. I'm sure that the likes of Kestrel would also be in a better position to employ their machines year round, instead of only during the Australian fire season.

And before someone else says it, CASA needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st Century to make overseas firefighting ops commercially profitable for VH Reg/AOC holders :ugh:

[Checkboard]

I'm an airline Pilot.

I've seen "Always" (the movie).

Can't be too hard. ;)

[601]

Politics, the government doesn’t want to invest in it. They’d rather spend money elsewhere. (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6568613/why-is-shark-one-more-important-than-the-fire-bombers/)

it isn’t just AFAP, emergency service chiefs have been campaigning for more water bombers since before last fire season. (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/former-fire-chief-calls-out-pm-over-refusal-of-meeting/11705330)Looks like their pleas are still falling on deaf ears.

If you go back to the 90s, you will find that it was the fire services, by whatever name in each state, that were vehemently opposed to aerial assets.
We had CL215s demonstrated here only to be dismissed as the "fires here are different"

In North America, aircraft such as the purpose-built Canadiar CL-215 floatplane utilise North America’s massive system of lakes to scoop six thousand litres of water in less than twenty seconds, then dumping this onto nearby fires.

In Australia, that readily available fresh water is unavailable. Our aircraft primarily operate from fixed bases, using tank water or retardant. Salt water can be used with associated operational and environmental restrictions.

Canadair in their study put that notion to bed.
In any event the fundamental purpose of the SuperScooper is to put out bush fires before they rage out of control
One of the biggest criticisms of the aircraft is the supposed lack of water sources suitable for scooping. The fact is that there is more scoopable water adjacent to high risk areas (see attached maps) than the detractors would have you believe. In many, many cases, a quick survey of your fire district will indicate that scooping water is available. The combined national firefighting forces which responded to the New South Wales fires could have been very effectively supported by Canadair aircraft.For example, the fire which almost destroyed Winmalee in the Blue Mountains could have been controlled two days before the fire reached the urban area. Scooping from the Nepean river, and with a flying distance of23 kilometers to Mt. Wilson,

2 CL-215's could have dropped at least 188,000 liters of firefighting foam on the fire before nightfall on Thursday, leaving fire crews to trek in to the fire site the next morning to black out the fire completely. Instead, nearly three days passed, with a very risky backburn conducted, before the fire hit Winmalee with terrifying force.

To the north, in the Banyabba Nature Reserve, Bush Fire units had to drive for four hours before reaching the fire front whereas two CL-215's could have dropped a conservative 288,000 liters of fire fighting foam per day on the fire.

[currawong]

If you go back to the 90s, you will find that it was the fire services, by whatever name in each state, that were vehemently opposed to aerial assets.
We had CL215s demonstrated here only to be dismissed as the "fires here are different"



Canadair in their study put that notion to bed.

You do realise scooping aircraft are already based/ utilised here?

https://youtu.be/Bd1zb07tLOU

[The Banjo]

Is this what Col Pay was developing when he "bought the farm?".

[currawong]

Is this what Col Pay was developing when he "bought the farm?".

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/157

[RadioSaigon]

Is this what Col Pay was developing when he "bought the farm?".

No. ...........

[Runaway Gun]

The Firefighting endorsement is for fixed wing Ag pilots with a minimum of 250hrs of ag.

[Sunfish]

I am always relieved to have a water bomber or two “in support” of us. It makes the job easier and the less time I spend on the end of a fire rake or knapsack spray the better. There is also the possibility that they might be able to protect us if the fire gets out of hand.

[chimbu warrior]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=88&v=vb84ZZjM0qw&feature=emb_logo

Blackhawk PIC fighting fires at 19 years old.

[Squawk7700]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=88&v=vb84ZZjM0qw&feature=emb_logo

Blackhawk PIC fighting fires at 19 years old.

Makes it easy when daddy owns the company and or helicopter :-)

[601]

You do realise scooping aircraft are already based/ utilised here?

The document I quoted from was written around 1992.

Viking has acquired Bombardier’s Amphibious Aircraft program, which includes Type Certificates for CL-215 and CL-415 and after-market services.
The company has produced a further modernised model of the aircraft, designated as the CL-515 or the Viking Canadair 515 First Responder. This will carry 7000Lts
The next available new production aircraft is 2025.

We have missed the boat!!

[TBM-Legend]

The document I quoted from was written around 1992.

Viking has acquired Bombardier’s Amphibious Aircraft program, which includes Type Certificates for CL-215 and CL-415 and after-market services.
The company has produced a further modernised model of the aircraft, designated as the CL-515 or the Viking Canadair 515 First Responder. This will carry 7000Lts
The next available new production aircraft is 2025.

We have missed the boat!!


That assumes the 415/515 is the right aircraft.

But if you also think that a few surplus airline pilots can step into a Large Air Tanker then read this:

​​​​​​https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/577867...lBlsPZaBBEnSig (https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5778677/ao-2020-007_interim.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1k6Y20zY3vUrvl-_27kyUeF6ugN23hIcUrWoANBt6FvlBlsPZaBBEnSig)

[dr dre]

But if you also think that a few surplus airline pilots can step into a Large Air Tanker then read this:


No one was ever saying that surplus airline pilots could merely "step" into a LAT and immediately begin firefighting ops.

What was proposed was airline pilots using their endorsements and substantial experience on type could enter into an aerial firefighting role as SIC after having received specific aerial firefighting training, then hone their skills to proceed to the LHS once a commensurate experience level was reached. No one suggested getting two stood down airline pilots, shoving them into a tanker and saying "off you go and figure it out for yourselves"

Of course this would be better done as a long term project to create an Australian Aerial Firefighting Service and develop our own home grown capabilities. I could even imagine a reserve style system where some members would fly for an airline during the winter and then spend some time in firefighting role over summer.

[Eclan]

Coulson prefer to recruit experienced firebombing pilots and convert them to the type than take an experienced airliner pilot and train him to firebomb.

[Sunfish]

No one was ever saying that surplus airline pilots could merely "step" into a LAT and immediately begin firefighting ops.

What was proposed was airline pilots using their endorsements and substantial experience on type could enter into an aerial firefighting role as SIC after having received specific aerial firefighting training, then hone their skills to proceed to the LHS once a commensurate experience level was reached. No one suggested getting two stood down airline pilots, shoving them into a tanker and saying "off you go and figure it out for yourselves"

Of course this would be better done as a long term project to create an Australian Aerial Firefighting Service and develop our own home grown capabilities. I could even imagine a reserve style system where some members would fly for an airline during the winter and then spend some time in firefighting role over summer.

I have enough experience of Australian organisational ability, Australian politics, the Green movement, regulators, public servants and Australian unions to categorically state that what you propose, if implemented today, would be an absolute disaster for the country. Do you want me to spell it out? Let Coulson and company do the job and tell the AFAP to but out.

[Roj approved]

Dr Dre, this would be a great idea. A long term project to establish an aerial fire fighting capability like the Canadians/USA and Europeans have. As mentioned we could even contract it out in our winter.

Unfortunately, I think SunFish might on the money. We just don’t seem to be able to plan beyond the next election cycle in this country. The debacle of the States v Feds with Covid is showing us that there isn’t any cooperation at state/federal government level on anything.

The reality is, Coulson et al, would still hold the contract, supply the hardware, but would be required to employ and train a percentage of local pilots so in the years to come we would have a skeleton local crew through the winter, with the overseas contingent arriving with more airframes and personnel for the summer.

We currently have a “crew” of pilots and observers, to operate the “Firescan” Learjet, sitting in Nowra, fully paid, not doing anything, they would be a good group to send to Canada/USA to start training.

There would be enough local pilots that have spent the last 10+ years fighting fires in their helo’s and Ag tractors that would be able to step up to some bigger machines, Also ex military guys and girls with low level experience.

One of the biggest hurdles for the LAT’s is the refilling recourses available. So there are some more jobs for our locals. Equipment could be spread around suitable airports, and maybe a few mobile units, and be maintained by the local RFS/CFS or council ready for use as required.

There are sectors of GA that are struggling currently, this could be a legitimate career path for some of those newer pilots.

As the fire seasons seem to be getting longer, they are starting to overlap with the Northern hemisphere, so we need to have some assets on the ground year around. This would allow for training during the “off” season with the CFS during the back burning, thus keeping the crew current and most importantly, SAFE.

The AFAP didn’t just say ex airline pilots, it’s about all Australian pilots getting an opportunity.

The major hurdle in all of this will be CASA, so it’s probably just a pipe dream 😩

[dr dre]

I have enough experience of Australian organisational ability, Australian politics, the Green movement, regulators, public servants and Australian unions to categorically state that what you propose, if implemented today, would be an absolute disaster for the country. Do you want me to spell it out? Let Coulson and company do the job and tell the AFAP to but out.

Funny how in Australia we can provide governmental or private sector contracted to government services for Coastwatch, Maritime Search and Rescue, Air Ambulance, Police Aviation, Military, Aerial Firefighting using smaller aircraft without an apparent issue but Aerial Firefighting using larger aircraft is impossible and would be a "national disaster"? How do those other services seem to operate without being in a state of "national disaster" whereas Coulson are the only people on the planet who can ever perform large scale aerial firefighting? I don't begrudge AFAP at all for trying to develop a native large scale aerial firefighting capability and provide long term jobs for Australians in one of the fire prone nations on earth.

As for interference from the "Green movement" etc, we're not going to bring up those "greenies caused the bushfires" lies again are we? Which have been debunked by the Chief of the NSW RFS (https://7news.com.au/sunrise/on-the-show/shane-fitzsimmons-dismisses-barnaby-joyces-claims-bushfires-caused-by-green-caveats-c-637354), the former NSW Fire Commissioner (https://www.smh.com.au/national/this-is-not-normal-what-s-different-about-the-nsw-mega-fires-20191110-p5395e.html), the Chief of the Vic CFA (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-07/not-a-silver-bullet:-cfa-calls-for-calm-over-backburning/11849720?nw=0), various scientists (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/12/is-there-really-a-green-conspiracy-to-stop-bushfire-hazard-reduction), frontline Fire Brigades (https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-fire-brigade-dispels-the-rumour-that-greens-are-to-blame-for-bushfires-20200105), frontline Firefighters, (https://www.firerescue1.com/wildfire-prevention/articles/australian-ff-confronts-false-science-outright-lies-about-bushfires-on-social-media-uIdqv30dTE2hwazE/) more frontline Firefighters (https://www.northerndailyleader.com.au/story/6494097/opinion-we-did-burnoffs-badja-sparks-hits-back/), even more frontline Firefighters (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/08/opinion/australia-fires.html), Green politicians themselves... (https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-m-a-greens-minister-and-ordered-hazard-reduction-burning-20200109-p53q3h.html)

And whilst last summer's bushfires may have been replaced by Covid as the topic for uniformed "experts" to argue about on the internet, were you aware that the NSW Government released their inquiry into the bushfires (https://www.dpc.nsw.gov.au/assets/dpc-nsw-gov-au/publications/NSW-Bushfire-Inquiry-1630/Final-Report-of-the-NSW-Bushfire-Inquiry.pdf) in August? You should have a read, because almost every lie about those fires that was repeated throughout the media last summer was debunked.

Fuel loads weren't substantially higher than previous years, greenies weren't stopping hazard reduction, primary cause of the scale of the fires was the dryness of the vegetation and extreme weather conditions, arson was not a cause of any of the major fires and hazard reduction burning only has a limited effect on the most severe fires.

Whilst not commenting directly on who should be providing the pilots the inquiry backed more use of larger air tankers, RPAS, better funding and more use of local simulators with training carried out by the RFS, not an external provider.

[Lookleft]

You missed this bit dr:

We need to grab what is becoming possible in terms of unmanned aircraft and vehicles, and think big about what will make fire
fighting, and living in the community with fire, safer.

which negates the whole argument regarding crewing of LAT with Australian pilots.

In regards to the report I found that the best app to have on the phone during the fire crisis was the one that gave me access to the radio communication of the fire units. I was on the South Coast after the worst of the fires but you can get a lot of information out of the content and tone of the radio chatter.

[HomeJames]

Coulson prefer to recruit experienced firebombing pilots and convert them to the type than take an experienced airliner pilot and train him to firebomb.

Eclan,

So the SIC and FE of Bomber 134 were the exception rather than the rule? ATSB report states this year was their first fire season.

[Wunwing]

Crew qualifications in this are interesting. The report that PIC was endorsed low level but there is no mention of 250 hours or low level qualifications of the FO or FE.
I'm not sure what would apply to the FE as in the case of Hercs, is a PFE not a pilot FE. I would have thought. any FE operating in this environment would need some extra training although it is possible that both had some prior USAF training that was not documented. If so why did CASA not ask prior to operations commencing?

What is also interesting is that all 3 crew appear to have been reservists. Their hours are very low verses the time spent in the forces. I wouild be interested to know if the UASF reservists had a different minimum altitude dump level to the private fire bombers? There may be something on that within the Fire Aviation website.

I would suggest that under the CASA system it would be very hard to blend the crop dusting time with heavy aircraft time. Multi crew ops are very different to single pilot ops. Anyone who has both would in normal times stay in the airline industry. For any operator fire bombing with heavies would surely be seen by crew as a stepping stone up or maybe a retirement job. Given the flying, intermittent pay and anti social work conditions I would suspect not too many airline pilots would want this as a retirement job.

I may also be jumping too soon but its interesting that in a short period of less than a year there have been 2 critical avionics and avionics procedure failures of US fire bombers out of a very small sample of aircraft. In this case it seems that the voice recorder had tripped in the US and was not picked up for a long period. There was no procedure to check it on a daily basis either . In my experience on "heavies" this would to be checked each sector by crew or engineering or both . Earlier there was a situation where a VLA left the West Coast of the US bound for Australia with no operational HFs. The antennae connections were sitting detached from the transceivers and neither engineering checks nor crew checks picked that up. Again normal airline ops would have checked this on the ground..

Maybe just coincidence or is the standard of at least avionics maintenance a bit lower than would be expected?
At this stage its too early to call, but if this keeps up I cant help but think that the imports are being held to a lower standard than the locals?.

Wunwing

[Eclan]

Eclan,

So the SIC and FE of Bomber 134 were the exception rather than the rule? ATSB report states this year was their first fire season.
I don't know about that but what I said was paraphrasing something I read in an article in which one of their senior management was quoted.

[TBM-Legend]

This saga says a lot about the Coulson culture. That C-130 didn't pass the USFS inspection in Boise Idaho on its first attempt and their operations manual seems to be wanting. The NSW RFS bought the B737 as a multi-role LAT able to carry pax as well as fire bombing [not at the same time] but being in Restricted Category no pax allowed other than essential crew. That the CVR hadn't worked since May 19 and it's not in the check-list again is an issue. The crew pressed on and were not cancelled by their ops people is also telling of a cultural deficiency too...early in the season they cancelled some Bird Dogs flights as the crew were not current IFR...

[Big Pistons Forever]

I have 17 years of firebombing experience, finishing up on the Lockheed Electra. The only airline guys we had worked their way up from bush operations before flying for an airline and kept their hands and feet up to speed flying homebuilts, floatplanes, warbirds etc. A zero straight to shiny jet guy never made it through training in my company, the kind of flying was just too different.

That being said the pure Ag or Beaver on floats guys never made it to the big iron fire bombers and did their whole career on VFR single pilot small tankers. Again the kind of flying was just too different.

[drpixie]

I have 17 years of firebombing experience, finishing up on the Lockheed Electra. The only airline guys we had worked their way up from bush operations before flying for an airline and kept their hands and feet up to speed flying homebuilts, floatplanes, warbirds etc. A zero straight to shiny jet guy never made it through training in my company, the kind of flying was just too different.

That being said the pure Ag or Beaver on floats guys never made it to the big iron fire bombers and did their whole career on VFR single pilot small tankers. Again the kind of flying was just too different.

Rings true with what I see in aero-medical. I see any number of recently retired airline captains who like the idea of a little light aero-medical flying to keep their hand in! (And it's always their "passion" - a turn-off word if ever.) The only ones who make it are the very few people who've maintained a good level of GA and single-pilot flying. (For perspective, we don't do "emergencies", no landing on the highway, no unapproved ALAs.) Our aero-medical is just too different from airline work; the stresses and priorities are completely different. You can't fall back on an ops manual and route procedures that cover all situations - you're regularly going somewhere you've never been before, at short notice, in poor conditions.

The last airline pilot to join us told me that (despite continuous single-pilot GA throughout his career) that he'd never worked as hard as during one of our "normal" days - now step up to a busy day.

So think about the difference between airline ops (big support teams, known routes, scheduled ops, detailed compliance to ops manual) and fire-bombing (limited support, always new/unknown locations, always on-demand ops, ops manual that permits/expects crew to be pilots) - the bombers flying appallingly long days (day after day), knowing people will die and homes will burn if they don't get through, in conditions would routinely ground airline ops.

Maybe you could carefully select some airline crew, and train them into firebombing, but I guess it would take many years for them to be up to speed and effective. That would be very expensive training. (And before some bright spark comments, no, there is no sim that replicates the stress and conditions of that kind of operation.)

[dr dre]

Rings true with what I see in aero-medical. I see any number of recently retired airline captains who like the idea of a little light aero-medical flying to keep their hand in! (And it's always their "passion" - a turn-off word if ever.)


It’s funny how everyone seems to have lots of stories of all these “retired airline pilots” who suddenly decide to take up strenuous single pilot GA careers on retirement en masse. I’ve known plenty of retired airline pilots, every single one of them upon retirement from their airline retires from full time work full stop. A few take up something like casual instructing or scenic flights but a new career in a demanding single pilots job generally aimed at younger people??

If those stories are true however it may be more of a case of age more than anything else. Some airline pilots around retirement age have had difficulty transitioning from one type of airliner to another, as evidenced by the article below. I think maybe a more viable target for a single pilot aerial work job would be one in their 30s or 40s who is well motivated and enthusiastic. Not withstanding the older pilots who have the same level of drive and adaptability as well:

Air New Zealand 'shafted' elderly pilots over Airbus training (https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/81195647/elderly-pilots-claim-air-new-zealand-shafted-them-over-airbus-training)

[Xeptu]

It’s funny how everyone seems to have lots of stories of all these “retired airline pilots” who suddenly decide to take up strenuous single pilot GA careers on retirement en masse. I’ve known plenty of retired airline pilots, every single one of them upon retirement from their airline retires from full time work full stop. A few take up something like casual instructing or scenic flights but a new career in a demanding single pilots job generally aimed at younger people??
Isn't that the truth, any Airline Pilot that has been in a multicrew airline operation for the last 20+ years and nothing else has zero chance of going back to a commercial single pilot IFR job.
They all think they can though, myself included. About the only way back to single pilot IFR in anything high performance is in your own aircraft, even then it takes 6 months to get back up to speed, there is so much you have to do and think about yourself, if you ever knew how to do it in the first place. Hands up anyone who has built their own one engine out departure obstacle clearance flight path procedure. (aircraft type specific) or built a flight plan from scratch for that matter.

[Capn Rex Havoc]

DRs and Xeptu,

You are talking about the previous aviation world, one that has disappeared thank to Covid. I know of over 1000 EK pilots who are now out of work. Many of them, myself included, are not ready for "Retirement". DrPixie - I think you don't really know the challenges of working for an Airline like EK. Due to their vast network, you could be rostered to go to a destination somewhere on the planet you have never been to, at night, to conditions that most Australian pilots will never face. eg Minus 20deg C cold weather ops, having crossed the Himalayas into Beijing, or across the North Pole to JFK, or into Moscow, or Harare, etc. I know dozens of airline captains that are ex military, ex ga, ex charter, and very very experienced in their past lives. I really don't think its a stretch for these ex airline pilots to undertake whatever role they desire or are motivated to take. It's a new aviation world out there.

[Xeptu]

DRs and Xeptu,

You are talking about the previous aviation world, one that has disappeared thank to Covid. I know of over 1000 EK pilots who are now out of work. Many of them, myself included, are not ready for "Retirement". DrPixie - I think you don't really know the challenges of working for an Airline like EK. Due to their vast network, you could be rostered to go to a destination somewhere on the planet you have never been to, at night, to conditions that most Australian pilots will never face. eg Minus 20deg C cold weather ops.

Sure! It's a different operation in a different world, I didn't mean it was impossible. Our Airline Pilots have it easy really, everything is done for us and we go to the same major centres, very rarely is something new, unless it's a charter operation. I'm talking about single pilot IFR, where you're it, no assistance, 24 hours notice. It takes awhile to spool up to that.

[neville_nobody]

I'm talking about single pilot IFR, where you're it, no assistance, 24 hours notice. It takes awhile to spool up to that.



I think you will find that about 98% of Australian airline pilots have been there done that, many would have been doing it in the pre internet briefing period too. It's not that hard these days honestly. You guys make out like you are flying into interstellar space.

[ACMS]

I think you will find that about 98% of Australian airline pilots have been there done that, many would have been doing it in the pre internet briefing period too. It's not that hard these days honestly. You guys make out like you are flying into interstellar space.


Yes they do, possibly only trying to protect their little piece of turf....

[Xeptu]

I mean no offence guys, I came in on the back of the Retired Airline Pilot statement. presumably therefore over 60's, why would you want to work. no it's not that hard, in fact flying the machine is the easy part, so long as you're well organised and ahead of the game. It's everything else you have to do, all those things you have long since forgotten about.

[Xeptu]

That bit made me laugh.

Hahaaar! I probably was a bit generous with the notice, but we old folk can't be rushed :)

[FPDO]

They dont need a skillet to do firebombing, its an aircraft and knowledge they need, you thinking skillet because you burnt the Risotto last night?

[Lookleft]

Well according to the Bushfire Royal Commission they recommend a fleet of aircraft based in Australia. If it happens they won't be short of applicants looking for what would amount to a government airline job.

[On eyre]

Well according to the Bushfire Royal Commission they recommend a fleet of aircraft based in Australia. If it happens they won't be short of applicants looking for what would amount to a government airline job.

Fleet just means more than one which is what, in multiple types, we’ve got now.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Well according to the Bushfire Royal Commission they recommend a fleet of aircraft based in Australia. If it happens they won't be short of applicants looking for what would amount to a government airline job.

Airline hey.

[Sunfish]

Here we go again...... Another useless bureaucracy, Canberra based. Staffed by ex RAAF has beens. They will spend millions just on choosing the logo, then more millions on consultation with CASA, then tens of millions on writing the ops manual, diversity manual, gender equity rules, “liaison” committees involving all the states, environment groups, etc., etc. Then there is the task of selecting aircraft. It should only take two years after they have finished the ops manual to write the draft request for tender. Then eighteen months for a response, then twelve months for evaluation of responses and selection of successful bidder.

Folks, if I couldn’t spend half a billion and string it out to ten years before a drop of retardant fell from the sky from one of these aircraft, I would be a failed bureaucrat.

‘Successful businesses. like systems, start as very small and nimble operations that grow. Just look at the disaster of the NBN, etc. to see what happens when big government tries to do new things.

[havick]

Here we go again...... Another useless bureaucracy, Canberra based. Staffed by ex RAAF has beens. They will spend millions just on choosing the logo, then more millions on consultation with CASA, then tens of millions on writing the ops manual, diversity manual, gender equity rules, “liaison” committees involving all the states, environment groups, etc., etc. Then there is the task of selecting aircraft. It should only take two years after they have finished the ops manual to write the draft request for tender. Then eighteen months for a response, then twelve months for evaluation of responses and selection of successful bidder.

Folks, if I couldn’t spend half a billion and string it out to ten years before a drop of retardant fell from the sky from one of these aircraft, I would be a failed bureaucrat.

‘Successful businesses. like systems, start as very small and nimble operations that grow. Just look at the disaster of the NBN, etc. to see what happens when big government tries to do new things.

What are you talking about? NAFC recently signed the lions share of big contracts to Coulson who have met their obligations. Along with just about every other NAFC contract.

[Sunfish]

Havick, I believe NAFC is a relatively small and therefore efficient purchasing operation, a business unit, that flies “below the radar” as a simple procurer and allocator of aircraft.

What is proposed is many times bigger than NAFC and has a much wider role and therefore budget of its own. That will draw bureaucratic drones like flies to a honeypot.

[Lookleft]

Its your worst nightmare Sunfish:

Recommendation 8.1 A sovereign aerial firefighting capability
Australian, state and territory governments should develop an Australian-based and registered national aerial firefighting capability, to be tasked according to greatest national
need. This capability should include:
(1) a modest, very large air tanker/large air tanker, and Type-1 helicopter capability, including supporting infrastructure, aircrew and aviation support
personnel, and
(2) any other aerial firefighting capabilities (eg Light Detection and Ranging(LiDAR), line-scanning, transport, and logistics) that would benefit from a
nationally coordinated approach.

If the COVID response is anything to go by there is no Australian government, only State and Territory. Once the aircraft are sent to WA or QLD they will never be seen again.

[Sunfish]

Lookleft, all I see is another brand new ten story building in Canberra full of public servants and glossy brochures. I attended a fire two years ago started by two kids doing circle work in an old ute in the King Valley (myhree fire) . By the time we got there as backup an hour and a half later, Elvis and two Hercules were already working the ridge.

How fast is this new national body going to be able to react? How do we avoid a national fleet turning into a white elephant - too slow to react, too important to be used on small fires and, like the grand fleet at Scapa Floe, being kept in reserve for “the big one?”.

[havick]

Lookleft, all I see is another brand new ten story building in Canberra full of public servants and glossy brochures. I attended a fire two years ago started by two kids doing circle work in an old ute in the King Valley (myhree fire) . By the time we got there as backup an hour and a half later, Elvis and two Hercules were already working the ridge.

How fast is this new national body going to be able to react? How do we avoid a national fleet turning into a white elephant - too slow to react, too important to be used on small fires and, like the grand fleet at Scapa Floe, being kept in reserve for “the big one?”.

It’s quite simple, you would have NAFC build into the next round of tenders that companies must be australian owned and operated under a CASA AOC and not a discreet AOC with aircraft registered abroad.

Watch everything come to a grinding halt as CASA gets their fingers in the pie.

[flamingmoe]

https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/overhaul-ad-hoc-aerial-firefighting-system-pilots-20200914-p55vgq

Which one is it? Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

Nomination for ****** of the year ☝️ 😂

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Is it arrogance or ignorance to think airline pilots have the skillset to move across to firebombing with minimal re-training?

The middle one.