Wildfire Today

Inspections required on large air tankers

Bill GabbertFebruary 8, 2012August 12, 2019Uncategorizedair tanker, Photo by Bill G8 Comments

Neptune’s P2V air tanker 45 on the Whoopup fire southeast of Newcastle, WY, July 18, 2011. Photo by Bill Gabbert

Update at 11:37 a.m. MT, February 9, 2012

The other ten P2Vs passed the inspections.

Update at 4:52 p.m. MT, February 8, 2012

The Federal Aviation Administration has issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive (EAD) that requires inspections of P2V aircraft after a large crack was found in a wing spar and skin on one of Neptune Aviation’s P2V-7 air tankers. The EAD, intended for the owners and operators of Lockheed P2V aircraft, says the 24-inch crack propagated through the wing front spar web, lower chord, and wing lower skin. The FAA is requiring “a detailed inspection for cracks, working fasteners, and other anomalies, including surface damage in the form of a nick, gouge, or corrosion; and repairing if necessary.”

We talked with a spokesperson for the FAA who told us that their agency does not “ground” aircraft, however the Emergency Airworthiness Directive requires that inspections of the P2V air tankers be completed within one day of the operators receiving the notification. Then they must report to the FAA the findings, positive or negative, of the inspections.

We will update this article when we have more information.

This affects all of the large air tankers that are under a standard U.S. Forest Service exclusive use contract. All 11 of them are P2Vs — nine operated by Neptune and two by Minden. In 2002 there were 44 large air tankers on USFS contracts.

One additional air tanker not affected is the jet-powered BAe-146 which is being flown by Neptune under temporary “interim” approval from the Interagency Air Tanker Board. After a year of testing it was granted “interim” approval status last fall and is being considered for full approval. The last we heard it was out of service and undergoing a major scheduled maintenance at the Tronos facility on Prince Edward Island in Canada. Minden also has a BAe-146 under development and is hoping to have it flying over fires this fire season.

The USFS cancelled Aero Union’s contract for their eight P3 air tankers last summer, saying the company did not complete some required inspections. The P3 air tankers are not affected by this FAA directive, but Aero Union has closed their doors and is auctioning their air tankers and other assets this month.

The remaining USFS-contracted air tankers were scheduled to come on earlier than usual this year. One of Minden’s P2Vs is scheduled to start on February 15, and the agency asked Neptune to have their first aircraft mission-ready by February 26. Three more airtankers are scheduled to begin their Mandatory Availability Periods (MAP) in March (one Minden, two Neptune), two are scheduled to begin their MAPs in April, and four are scheduled to come on board in May.

Rick Hatton, the President and CEO of 10 Tanker Air Carrier was not offered an exclusive use contract for their two DC-10 Very Large Air Tankers by the U.S. Forest Service, and only has a call when needed contract with the agency. The DC-10s carry 11,600 gallons, about four times the capacity of a standard large air tanker. Mr. Hatton told Wildfire Today this morning:

We did some good work with the 10s in 2011 in 6 states plus Canada. With over 420 missions on over 70 fires, we are hopeful of being awarded a multiple aircraft contract in 2012. Two are ready for that, and we can add one every 6 months if contracted. The 10 can do the work of 4+ alternative aircraft, and can really fill a big part of the fleet needed now and in future years.

The USFS has put all of their eggs into one basket, with all 11 of their contracted air tankers being the same model, except for the BAe-146 which has interim approval. This is not the first time that all aircraft of the same model have been grounded. The agency could have seen this coming and should have been prepared. Since the two fatal crashes in 2002 which permanently grounded several models of ancient air tankers, the USFS has had 10 years to rebuild the aging fleet, but sat on their hands watching the fleet decay from 44 air tankers to 11, as they were hampered by indecision and analysis paralysis.

Have the chickens come home to roost? Maybe the 24-inch cracks found in the 50+ year old P2V can be easily fixed, and perhaps the other 10 P2Vs will get a clean bill of health — until the next crash or Emergency Airworthiness Directive. Or, the worst case scenario is that an analysis will determine that a weakness has been discovered that, for safety reasons, will permanently ground all P2V air tankers, reducing the fleet to one air tanker on “interim” approval status.

We all know that 50-60 year old aircraft are going to have more safety and maintenance issues than more modern aircraft. The USFS’ request for proposal for “next generation” turbine-powered air tankers is a step in the right direction, but we didn’t see anything in the RFP that required WHICH generation they belong to, or that they be, for example, less than 20 years old. Jennifer Jones, a spokesperson for the USFS told us today that they expect to award the first of these next-gen contracts in April of this year. In addition, Ms. Jones told us:

Until we are notified otherwise by the vendors, we expect the [P2V] airtankers to be available at the start of their mandatory availability periods. The U.S. Forest Service is committed to modernizing the Large Airtanker Fleet. The agency is currently developing a strategy to improve and modernize the fleet.

The Hawkins and Powers C-130A air tanker that crashed on June 17, 2002 near Walker, California when the wings fell off, had a series of fatigue cracks in the skin panel of the right wing which grew together to become 12-inches long and were found to have propagated past the area where they would have been covered by the doubler and into the stringers beneath the doubler and across the lap joint between the middle skin panel and the forward skin panel.

New model for Incident Management Teams

Bill GabbertFebruary 6, 2012January 8, 2020Uncategorizedarea command, Evolving Incident Management, Incident Management Team, NWCG5 Comments

Big Elk Fire, Wyoming, July, 2009 — Big Elk Fire, Wyoming, July, 1999. Photo: Bill Gabbert

The National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) has released a new organizational model for Incident Management Teams (IMT), titled Evolving Incident Management: A Recommendation for the Future.

(Apparently they decided not to make a recommendation for the past.)

In light of smaller federal work forces, more state and local IMTs, and longer fire seasons, the NWCG recognized that the current workforce management and succession planning for wildfire response is not sustainable. The new plan, which refers to a “decrease in Federal capacity”, admits that one of the primary purposes of the new model is to help find a solution to the difficulty in filling positions on IMTs, in part due to the smaller work forces. This, in spite of the fact that the U.S. Forest Service routinely assures congressional panels and the public that the federal government has plenty of wildland fire suppression capability and the budgets proposed by the Administration for the land management agencies are sufficient for protecting the public lands.

Some of the recommended changes are very significant, such as combining the Type 1 and Type 2 IMTs into just one type of team, and reducing the total number of federally sponsored teams from 55 to 40.

The entire 51-page document can be found HERE. Below, in the bullets, are some of the highlights of the new system:

Number of Teams. The target number of federally sponsored IMTs is 40.
Typing of Teams. Merge all federally sponsored type 1 and type 2 teams into one type of IMT.
NIMO teams.There [would continue to] be four National Incident Management Organization (NIMO) teams supervised and managed by the USDA Forest Service.
Incident Complexity and Scalability. There are three response levels: Initial attack (type 4 and 5 incidents), extended attack (type 3 incidents managed by type 3 IMTs) and complex incidents managed by IMTs.
State teams. IMTs sponsored by states would provide surge capacity at elevated geographic area and national preparedness levels under the recommended model.
Team Management and Dispatching. Geographic area coordination centers would manage IMT rotations for their geographic area until the national preparedness level reaches 3. At preparedness level 3 and above the National Interagency Coordination Center coordinates the IMT rotation in consultation with the geographic area coordination centers.
Team Funding. Each IMT would receive an established amount of support funding provided by the agencies in their home geographic area. Teams are provided with administrative staff support to support ICs with management of their team rosters and other logistical needs.
Team Size and Configuration. IMTs are composed of 27 members and 14 trainees in the recommended organizational model. The IMTs are available in short team and long team configurations.
Area Command. Short-term recommendations (2012–2015) include (1) maintaining four area command teams, and (2) formalizing the current management of the four area command teams as a pool of interchangeable personnel sufficient to staff four teams. Long-term recommendations (2016 and beyond) include transitioning area command teams to strategic management teams. This would more accurately reflect the changing demands for an oversight group to provide strategic planning, risk management, command, control, coordination, information management, and preparedness support. This transition would also be the source for innovative processes, procedures, and technology to support incident objectives.
Performance and Accountability. All agency administrators in units with wildland fire programs would have a performance standard or element for fire management. Expectations for each agency’s level of participation should be developed based on their percent of wildland fire workload.
Incentives. Incentives for participation should be a part of the implementation plan for the recommended organizational model. Disincentives should be identified and reduced or eliminated.
Workforce Development. Develop a robust and coordinated succession planning system linking workforce development to staffing of IMTs.

The NWCG expects to implement the new model over the next five to ten years.

Several interesting facts showed up in the document, such as on page 22:

Although the number of IMTs has remained relatively stable since 2004, the composition of teams has changed. The Federal workforce has shrunk, especially in some parts of the country. For example, the USDA Forest Service workforce in Oregon and Washington has gone from 7,893 employees in 1990 to 3,630 employees in 2010. IMT make-up has shifted from Federal militia to a higher percentage of state, local government, and retired Federal (second career and AD) participation.

And these three charts:
Continue reading “New model for Incident Management Teams”

Learning fire behavior from the experts

Bill GabbertFebruary 3, 2012August 25, 2019UncategorizedDick Rothermel6 Comments

The Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center is doing great work. I recently ran across a treasure trove of videos that they produced and uploaded to YouTube. Previously the LLC hosted the videos on their own site, but they have revisited that decision and are moving them to YouTube, where they are much more accessible.

The five videos about fire behavior that I embedded here have been on YouTube for one to two months but have only been viewed between 2 and 18 times as of February 3, 2012. These interviews with recognized experts in fire behavior are an attempt to capture and preserve knowledge that may help those coming up through the ranks. Maybe a viewer will learn something that might have taken them years otherwise, or it may prevent a firefighter from making a costly mistake.

Of the 12 videos in this “Learning from the Experts: Fire Behavior” series, I selected these 5 simply because I know or have been taught by these individuals, but check out the other 7 videos also.

In the video below: Richard Rothermel began research and writing on a fire spread model that is still taught in fire management classes today. This model of Rothermel’s is the basis for today’s S-490 class.

In the video below, Rob Seli addresses how to ask the right questions about the modeling tool.

In the video below, Patti Koppenol describes her process of assessing risk.
Continue reading “Learning fire behavior from the experts”

Elephants and rhinoceroses for fire prevention?

Bill GabbertFebruary 3, 2012October 13, 2012UncategorizedAustralia, Tasmania

A scientist in Australia has proposed that elephants and rhinoceroses be used in the Northern Territory of the country to reduce the intensity of wildfires. According to David Bowman, an environmental scientist at the University of Tasmania, this introduced exotic species would help control another introduced exotic species, gamba grass.

Gamba grass was brought into the country from Africa in the 1930s for cattle ranchers who said it produced more feed for livestock than native grasses. Since then the grass has spread across a large portion of Australia’s Northern Territory and burns very intensely. When gamba grass matures, it becomes tall and woody and is undesirable by cattle or native species like kangaroos. But back in Africa, elephants and rhinoceroses love the grass. Mr. Bowman thinks elephants and rhinos would reduce the grass enough to slow the spread and intensity of wildfires.

Australia is already spending millions of dollars to control the spread of other introduced species like camels and water buffaloes.

Mr. Bowman said rhinos and elephants could be sterilized so they could not reproduce, and they could be restricted by fences and tracked with radio collars.

What could possibly go wrong?

Jay Esperance named Director of Wildland Fire Suppression in SD

Bill GabbertFebruary 2, 2012March 3, 2017UncategorizedJay Esperance, South Dakota

Jay Esperance has been selected as the new Director of the Division of Wildland Fire Suppression in South Dakota. Mr. Esperance replaces Joe Lowe who retired January 23.

Mr. Esperance will begin his new job on February 13. His present position is Fire Management Officer for the Bureau of Land Management’s High Plains District out of their Casper, Wyoming field office. He has had some fire experience in South Dakota, most recently being assigned as the Incident Commander on Rocky Mountain Incident Management Team C the day following the death of Trampus Haskvitz, August 11, 2011 on the Coal Canyon fire north of Edgemont, SD. He was also the Deputy Incident Commander on the Whoopup fire several miles north of the Coal Canyon fire in July, 2011 (slide show of photos of the Whoopup fire).

Below is the news release from the South Dakota Division of Wildland Fire Suppression:

===============================================================

Esperance Named Director of Wildland Fire Suppression for SDDA

PIERRE, S.D – Jay Esperance has been named as the new Director of Wildland Fire Suppression for the South Dakota Department of Agriculture (SDDA). He will begin his duties on Feb. 13.

“Jay is a great addition to the department,” said South Dakota Secretary of Agriculture Walt Bones. “His experiences in fire management will be an asset to residents of the Black Hills and the forestry industry.”

Esperance, who has a bachelor of science degree in Resource Management from the University of California-Sacramento, has spent the past 11 years as a fire-management officer for the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Prior to that, he spent 23 years with the U.S. Forest Service in the Pacific Northwest working primarily in reforestation and timber stand improvement and later in forest genetics.

As director of Wildland Fire Suppression, Esperance will oversee a number of wildland fire prevention and suppression programs on state and private lands.

“It’s an honor to be selected for this position,” he said. “I’m excited to work with the professional staff in the Division and anxious to work closely with the cooperating agencies and to provide fire protection for the residents of South Dakota.”

Esperance was the Operations Section Chief on two assignments to Australia; he also assisted with emergency support and recovery in New York City after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and he has responded during five hurricanes.

Wildfire potential, February through May, 2012

Bill GabbertFebruary 1, 2012February 1, 2012Uncategorizedpotential, weather1 Comment

The Predictive Services section at the National Interagency Fire Center has issued their National Wildland Significant Fire Potential Outlook for February through May, 2012. According to their prediction, several areas of the United States will have above normal wildfire potential during this period.

Here is an excerpt from their report:

================================================================

La Niña: La Niña remains at near moderate strength and is expected to slowly weaken during the spring months. Classic weather patterns of wet and cold in the northwest and warm and dry in the south are expected, although intensity of these cannot be directly correlated to the strength of La Niña.

Drought: Significantly above normal precipitation fell January across parts of West and North Texas and southern Oklahoma. The Northwest also received significant precipitation. However, large parts of the Southwest and the Plains states remained much below normal. Severe to exceptional drought continues across the south central and far southeastern parts of the U.S. and over parts of the upper Mississippi valley.

Fuel Dryness: Late January and early February have brought a transition to much of the U.S. The southern tier continues to see drier than normal conditions, except across some portions of Texas, where precipitation is moistening fuels even though drought conditions remain prevalent. Also, tree mortality from drought will continue to be problematic. Across much of the west, including the Great Basin fine fuels remain heavy and continuous and are largely dry or capable of quickly drying. Significant fires will be possible with the combination of ignitions and windy conditions. The formerly dry Northwestern quarter of the country has begun to see significant moistening and snowpacks are beginning to increase. In the east the northern tier will largely be near normal seasonal fuel conditions with some dryness lingering across the Great Lakes states. The southeast will continue drier than normal fuels conditions south and east of the Tennessee Valley.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: