NZ Heavy Fire Bombing resource

[aeromedia]

Posting this as a basis for discussion.
Is there a case for NZ to create a Civil operated/contracted heavy aerial fire fighting resource. Receiving Govt funding.
But additionally, another question I have is:-
Is there any precedent for a quick-change retardant kit/fit that can be utilised by standard military C130’s? Anywhere?
And here’s another. Once the existing RNZAF Hercs are replaced by the J model, would it be reasonable to imagine them sold off for conversion to heavy fire fighters, or would it be too difficult to keep them viable, notwithstanding the updated kit they’ve received over the years.
I’m thinking of several as a joint Australasian force, able to respond either side of the Tasman as required.
Pie in the sky ? I don’t know.
But I’m keen to hear opinions, particularly from people who know what they’re talking about.

[keroburner]

I assume most of the country's helicopter companies would be very opposed to the idea.......

[joey05]

Unfortunately with the crash of the Coulson C130 yesterday (RIP) I would imagine our agencies would not consider the option, although I have no idea what I am talking about. Perhaps larger capacity helicopters (Puma, NH90, Hueys, Blackhawk) would be a good start for FENZ.

[tbf25o4]

If C130s in the local area were a viable option then the Australians have had the opportunity of turning the old C130es and C130Hs into fire bombers. I would guess that it was considered
too expensive to convert some just in case of fires in the summer months. What else could you do with a specialised tanker aircraft in the off season in Aussie?

[aeromedia]

Sub contract in the northern hemisphere I would have thought.

[Dave Homewood]

Off season? Does Aussie still have one of them? The USA and Canada don't, their aircraft fight fires all year round nowadays.

[chasper]

I lived in Simi Valley, California and the ANG C130's used the MAFFS2 system in the fire season. It was somewhat reassuring to see a line of 5-6 C130's blasting down the valley at about 500ft when the smoke was all around. The MAFFS 2 system left no retardant on the aircraft which was highly corrosive. The system was (is) a wheel on wheel off system with only a side door change required. I worked sometimes at NAS Point Mugu where the squadron was based and the crews loved that they could do this work.

[chis73]

Just my thoughts: civil option - no, not enough demand. Military option - as an optional payload package (roll on- roll off) - may be possible. Just incredibly unlikely. Let's face it, we are not going to get enough C-130Js let alone anything bigger: therefore - the C-130Js are going to be too busy to do this extra tasking anyway. Hell, judging from recent news stories, it seems the Treasury whisperers have gotten to Robertson already - it seems unlikely that even the pending C-130J order will come this term. Just how hard is it to pick a number between 4 & say 6, when you've just turned in a multi-billion-dollar operating surplus? But I digress...

In my 2016 Defence White Paper submission, I suggested a possible fire-fighting solution as a small number (say 4) of twin turboprop airlifters, with roll-on, roll-off payloads. The main role of these aircraft would have been maritime patrol, with a secondary within-NZ airlift role (like the USCG HC-144 does). My thinking was: we won't buy enough first-rate maritime patrol or airlift aircraft (due to expense), so cover both with a cheaper multi-role type. Firefighting would have been a 3rd role if technically possible. Climate change will only make larger wildfires more likely (particularly in the dry eastern regions).

As to what is currently out there as a part-time fire-fighter fixed-wing aircraft:
C27J: recently advertised a new roll-on, roll-off firefighting system at the 2019 Paris Airshow (Link here). Previously, has been tested with a system that worked by dropping cardboard boxes filled with fire retardant out the back of the aircraft (link here), testing done by the Bulgarians or Romanians I think. Simple, not sure how effective.

C295: has been tested with a roll-on, roll-off tank system in Spain several years ago (2013). There is video of them measuring the dispersal pattern (link here). Since then little has happened. Last I heard Airbus were getting consultants (Coulson) involved to develop a modular system for them similar to the one built for the C130. Seems stalled at the prototype stage.

And I nearly forgot about this puppy: the Flamingo GPS-guided fire-retardant bomb (link here). Also tested on the C295 (link here)

[rone]

A great idea to discuss. Unfortunately I brought up a similar topic during the fires down Christchurch way, but was shot down as being impractical to use RNZAF C130 as it meant more training for aircrews to keep current. I do believe however a private operation as suggested above has merit. An aircraft or two or three would be able to operate year round worldwide. As far as local helicopter companies, they would have to grin and bear it. Ok, a chopper can fill up from a lake ,river or any close by water source as against a C130 needing a reasonable airstrip and filling facilities. But a Helo carries 1000litres, a Herc. carries 15,000litres, meaning 15times the coverage per trip. Worth considering.

[saratoga]

Current defence minister has already (last week)demanded NZDF look into firefighting capability, to assist in times of large fires. Roll-on C-130 kit would be a logical choice, as opposed to seperate platforms.

[The Red Baron]

By my count theres 37 turbine ag planes which pretty much sit idle over the summer months,not to mention squadrons of choppers available at short notice with experienced local crews.
C-130 would be great at airshows and on the TV news,but most fires that break out here a reasonably small at first.
Most of the Aussie bush fires are so large they will only go out when they burn out or nature puts them out,not from aerial intervention.

[aeromedia]

Good input guys and I’m pleased to read your responses.
I’m hearing that our replacement J’s will probably not have any spare capacity for this role given the slim likely number of them.
Re training to operate in this role, I would have thought all training is worthwhile training.
I’m intrigued by the potential roll in-roll out capability for a platform such as a Herc.
I can think of several large fires in the South. In Marlborough and the Port Hills in Chch where 15,000 litres per sortie might have made a considerable impact. I guess my pitch to have a NZ owned platform is that it’s real value is in the the contribution to a mutual regional asset that would result.
In much the same way I’ve always thought a regional (Australasian) Defence force would be the answer.
I guess to some de facto extent, that happens anyway.
With exchanges, exercises etc.
Anyway, back to aerial fire fighting. Keep the thoughts coming.

[30sqnatc]

A C-130 painted in low viz colours designed to make it more difficult to be seen flying in and out of smoke clouds and haze while helos and other aircraft flit around all concentrated in a small area. Does that not get you worried?

[saratoga]

The new ones will be in rainbow colours, to be inclusive.

[chasper]

The ANG aircraft in California always had huge yellow numbering on them, both on the tail and behind the cockpit, 1, 2 and so on so very high viz. the aircraft were camo painted but you could see them and identify them from far away.

[30sqnatc]

Jan 25, 2020 18:52:26 GMT 12 chasper said:

The ANG aircraft in California always had huge yellow numbering on them, both on the tail and behind the cockpit, 1, 2 and so on so very high viz. the aircraft were camo painted but you could see them and identify them from far away.

Yeah realise that but sightly different situation The ANG has over four times the number of C-130 (in various forms) SQUADRONS than we have total airframes. To provide the degree of readiness we would have to have all our aircraft so painted. They would then look rather bizar when undertaking their real tactical missions.

I think the best we can offer the government is the Black Falcons in formation dropping balloons full of water. No more command 'smoke on', now it will be 'balloons loose'

[madmac]

Quick somebody convince the minister what we really need is an extra P-8 for spotting hot spots.

Actually slightly more seriously, pair of green P-8's with the fireliner STC (yes its currently only for classics). It gives use crew trainers of the P-8's , VIP transport and fire suppression all in one. Can't ever see that happening, the PM would never turn up anywhere with Airtanker numbers on the side of the fuse.

We didn't use all our air attack capicity in nelson, and there looks to cheaper methods to improve air attack (temporary airfields, improved turn times, etc). Adding capacity to the airforce would require more money, that arn't going to happen. A civilian 737 fireliner is probably the best bet, still plenty of 737 classics operated here, and there is sufficient work to keep a 100 seat charter aircraft in the country.

[paul1953]

How about NZ getting Canadiar CL -415? Viking Aircraft in Canada deal with them. Plenty of lakes and water in and around New Zealand for these types to operate and fight fires from.

[kiwined]

Interesting all these comments about the various types of aircraft that we should use here in NZ - most of them actually wont work here. Here are a few points.

CL415s - not suited to NZ conditions, for off the coast pickups need to have sea states under a certain limit - like Australia our sea states when the wind is up are up over that limit. In fact NAFC in Australia evaluated the CL415 and 215 some years ago and found they just werent suited to the conditions over there. They need over 1.2km straight line on a water source to fill up, unfortunately the amount of locations here are very very limited when taking that into consideration. Yes they can refil from airports but then so can the AT802 and Cresco so why buy a CL415.

RNZAF Hercs - Sorry but fire fighting is a VERY specialised skill set and unless you are current all the time then its not something the RNZAF should be involved in. I was on the fires in NSW when we lost Tanker 134 so even those who do this year round can get caught out. Hiring a company like Coulsons to operate a Herc or two is an option as they have the crews, the parts and the knowledge to do is safely. The Herc is NOT cheap to operate which is why RFS went down the 737 path in Australia when they decided what to buy - and then they contracted with Coulsons to operate it. The other thing to take into account is where you set up retardant or gel loading bases as the infrastructure to do this is massive. In NSW we had them operating out of RAAF Richmond, Canberra and two other smaller locations.

"A C-130 painted in low viz colours designed to make it more difficult to be seen flying in and out of smoke clouds and haze while helos and other aircraft flit around all concentrated in a small area. Does that not get you worried?" - Incorrect - when the tankers are inbound ALL helos are cleared from the drop location to allow the bird dog to do its show me runs and then the tanker will come in and drop. A tanker WILL NOT descend below the hard deck to drop until its confirmed all other traffic is out of the way. Normally they come in overhead around 8000ft and then get the clearance from the Air Attack to come lower. I have regularly been in the AAS machine looking down on the 737/DC10 and C130s as they drop- always impressive to watch.

"But a Helo carries 1000litres, a Herc. carries 15,000litres, meaning 15times the coverage per trip. Worth considering." - Disagree - its horses for courses. On many fires I have been on the tankers couldnt get in because of the visiblity and it was up to the helos to attack the fire. And many of the helos carry much more - 9000 litres in the Aircrane, I think the Hawk has about 3000 and when you have a tank or bucket on these machines and can pull water from a river or lake they can easily our perform a fixed wing as aircraft like the C130/RJ etc easily have over an hour turn around to reload and return. When I was on the Long Gully fire near Tenterfield it was an hour and a half turnaround for the 737, about 45 mins for the AT802s as they were only going back to Armidale and about 10 mins for the 212, 214, BK117s etc so you can do the math that just because the bigger aircraft can carry more doesnt mean its better. Also helos can also do pinpoint precision work and drop their loads on various different fires not just at one time like the tankers mostly do. Again horses for courses.

Here in NZ we do actually have a good makeup of aircraft both fixed wing and helos that we have access to. We have the Crescos and a couple of operators have done some pretty good work in converting these to fire fighters. I was also on the Nelson fires and the Crescos were used there to lay down retardant lines. There are AT502s or 602s here also. On the helo side we have a wide range of machines from AS350B3s, BK117s, Hueys and also the recently arrived UH60 Black Hawk. Looking at what we have apart from maybe one or two large airtanker types we are actually well covered. For the size and campaign length of the fires we have here we actually dont need a massive fleet. I have been back and forth on the fires in Australia since the start of August and they are a WHOLE different ball game and we cant compare us with them.

[agalbraith]

I agree Ned, you hit the nail on the head I reckon. I hadn't realized the Blackhawk had arrived yet? Talking to a local Waimack Council guy about it last year and he told me they were basing one out here in Rangiora?