Twin Otter used by Bridger Aerospace. Photo by Jarrod Wilkening.Bridger Aerospace is using a DeHavilland DHC-6-300 Twin Otter, N532CV, to train pilots to fly their new CL-415EAF water-dropping amphibious air tankers. The Twin Otter itself is not tanked, but K. Mita of Bridger said, “Essentially the Otter and [CL-415EAF] fly similar enough that it’s a great platform for new amphib pilots to train on. Once they graduate Otter school, they get to hop in the right seat of the CL.”
The CL-415EAF amphibious air tanker can skim across a body of water to refill the 1,400-gallon tank then drop it on a fire.
The scooper team will be training near Conroe, Texas from the end of January through March.
Air Tanker 281, a CL-415EAF, completed over 60 water drops in support of firefighters at the Cedar Fire south of Elko Nevada on its first ever mission. Photo July 21, 2020 by K Mita, Bridger Aerospace.The first CL-415EAF was delivered to Bridger Aerospace’s facility in Bozeman, Montana in April, 2020 as part of a contract that with all options exercised is valued at $204 million covering the purchase of six of the amphibious scooping air tankers.
The first use of one on a wildfire was Tanker 281 on the 6,000-acre Cedar Fire 15 miles south of Elko, Nevada where it completed over 60 water drops in support of firefighters.
The CL-415EAF modification program consists of converting CL-215 airframes to turbines using Viking-supplied conversion kits and replacing all obsolete components. It features a new Collins Pro Line Fusion integrated digital avionics suite, Pratt & Whitney PW123AF turbine engines, and increased water tank capacity with a higher delivery two-door water drop system. The conversion work is done in Canada by Longview Aviation Services in collaboration with Cascade Aerospace.
Bridger Aerospace’s Pilatus PC-12 will be coming online soon with a new paint scheme. It will be going into service as an air attack platform.
“We are pushing hard to demonstrate that the single-engine airframe is reliable and also quite comfortable,” Mr. Mita said. “So far, the response has been positive.”
12 Comments
Two questions:
1) Does not the FAA, unlike most countries, require a multi-engine float rating to be accomplished on a multiengine floatplane as opposed to one having a Muti Rating then getting a float rating and having the two married into one? And if so then one can assume the DHC6 is almost solely for benefit of the rating as opposed to firefighting training?
2) What is the PC12s predicted mission? Extraordinarily capable aircraft in about any role one may imagine. Anytime you can fly out at 260kts then loiter at 85kts for 7+hours is a winner from the get go.
The FAA issues category and class ratings on a pilot certificate.
Multi-engine sea and single engine sea are separate ratings, as are multi-engine land, and single engine land.
A separate checkride is required for each rating. A multi-engine sea rating must be accomplished in a multi-engine sea aircraft: either on floats, or a flying boat; neither need be amphibious.
A multi engine land rating, for example, does not translate to multi engine sea, if one holds a single engine sea rating. One must still receive training and take a checkride for the multi-engine sea rating.
There are only a few places in the US where multi engine sea training is available. Training options vary from an Aircam to Grumman Gooses, a Widgeon, and a Twin Bee. An outfit in California (Norcal Aviation) was doing the rating in a Piper Apache on floats, but that went a way a few years ago.
Andy the Twin Otter serves both purposes. The FAA is the only organization that I know of that requires both a single engine and a multi engine sea rating. In other countries a sea rating is a sea rating regardless of the aircraft type.
The new candidates not only get trained for their multi seaplane ratings but also the Twin Otter, in most cases is their first introduction into two crew operations. The Twin Otter and the Scooper are very similar in a lot of ways. The calls, checklists/ QRH, the SOP’s, crew coordination etc in the Twin Otter models that of the Scooper. When a new pilot moves from the Twin Otter to the Scooper it is pretty seamless.
I see. What are the typical new hire pilots background if not any multi-crew or multi engine flight experience? Obviously various companies have different requirements depending on contracts and equipment type.
Would love to see these replace Fire Bosses, much more capability and very impressive.
In what way? Speed, load, endurance, cost? Can you provide any numbers that support you claim?
Jeff, you’re correct that the 415 and the 215T are impressive. However, what you haven’t considered is cost. If you were to do a fair comparison including cost, on outcome/effectiveness, you would need to compare one 415 to multiple FireBosses, perhaps 8-10 FireBosses. Having been retired for a year now from my ATGS duties I do not have the exact current rates so I am estimating 8-10 based on previous knowledge.
In 30 years of Air Attack, 20 were spent supervising all 3 of these scoopers and all perform well if positioned in areas of the country where adequate water sources are available.
New hires typically have a float background from Beavers, Otters, Amphib Caravans etc. All will have some multi command time, usually single pilot AC 690’s etc from the Air attack side.
Unfortunately, the Twin Otter is a makeshift solution for training. In the future, they should use the new Grumman G-73T Mallard by Mallard Aircraft or the new Grumman G-111T Albatross by Amphibian Aerospace Industries.
Except, Gerry, neither of those aircraft – the Frakes G-73T turbine Mallard or the AAI G-111T turbine Albatross – are actually in production. Frakes has been looking to partner with an existing manufacturer for something like 8 years, with no luck so far. And AAI has been making wild promises and trying to obtain economic aid from local governments in Australia for almost as long. First in New South Wales and now up in Darwin in the Northern Territories. So far really nothing but talk, talk, and more talk. Even after they get beyond the all talk phase, it’ll take years to build new factories and start up actual new production of those aircraft. The Twotter is so far the only game in town.
The key words here are “In the future.”
The Grumman G-73T Mallard, by Mallard Aircraft, isn’t set up for firefighting. Just kicking around the numbers this bird doesn’t seem to project more than about 600-700 gallons capacity even with two PT-6’s on the wings. And there is no tanking system in mind as Mallard Aircraft is marketing the 73 for business executives
Amphibian Aerospace (Down Under), like Mallard Aircraft, is pitching the not-yet built ALL NEW Grumman G-111T Albatross as an executive aircraft but also will sell it as a commercial passenger aircraft too. The company specs note that it can be used for firefighting (4.5 Tons). Still no tanking system weight numbers to work with but rough, very rough estimates for capacity is around 1000 gallons.
Please feel free to check the specs and report back on the capacity number you work up. You won’t hurt me or my calculators feelings.
Oh, and no aircraft cost estimates given by either company.
Ugh. Why do they put that atrocious Type 2 lettering on their aircraft? “Arial Firefighter” and “Firefighter” and “Air Attack” ? It’s tacky and makes them look like a contract water tender from R6. They have nice aircraft but they’re really boogering them up those silly graphics .
Comments are closed for this article!