Bomber 210, a 737 air tanker. NSW RFS photo.It wasn’t that many years ago that Australia rarely if ever used large air tankers to assist “fireys” on the ground who were suppressing bushfires. But today their one and only large air tanker is flying across the Pacific to assist firefighters in the United States who are spread thin battling 61 large wildfires across several western states.
Bomber 210 (N138CG) has refueled in Hawaii and is on it’s last leg before landing in the United States. It is expected to be deployed for 45 days.
New South Wales Rural Fire Service 737 air tanker en route to the United States makes a stop in Hawaii July 21, 2021. Coulson Aviation image.When it arrives, Coulson will prepare the aircraft for operations within the US, which may take a few days.
The New South Wales Rural Fire Service purchased the 737 air tanker from Coulson Aviation in May of 2019 after using one on a contract basis during the 2018-2019 summer bushfire season.
In addition to the Boeing 737 Fireliner, NSW purchased two Cessna Citation V Lead/Intelligence Aircraft in 2019. All of the aircraft were accompanied by a ten-year operational contract for Coulson to provide all flight and maintenance personnel.
16 Comments
What happened to the 747SUPER TANKER ?
737 vs 747
It could not get a contract with the Forest Service so the company went out of business.
The 747 Supertanker is ceasing operations
Fire Aviation, Bill Gabbert, April 23, 2021
https://fireaviation.com/2021/04/23/the-747-supertanker-is-ceasing-operations/?hilite=%27747%27
Understand
I’m an aviation buff and aware of the suspended op but why ?
Was used last year ?
Why not have Cal Fire buy and operate .
Could leases it out to other countries which has been done in the past.
I’m pretty sure it would pay for it’s self .
It didn’t pay for itself. Those that were funding it elected to stop.
What will be the taxpayer bill for this single resource 4000 gallon airtanker? My guess will be about twenty million dollars for the contract period. The Forest Service did a good job of getting rid of the Supertanker. My guess would be for half the above amount (20M) the folks at Supertanker would have maybe changed their decision. Or was it just too much of a hassle dealing with the Feds. It will take six 3000 gallon loads (737) of retardant all afternoon to accomplish a Supertanker load of 18,000 gallons in one sortie, less than an hour total time.
It’s a shame that such a useful piece of fire fighting equipment is going to waste .
I’m not in the fire fighting buisness but I’m guessing that fighting the fires we have now in N Cal and north and south of Lake Tahoe have consumed $20Mil .
How “useful” is equipment that never sees use?
Not going to waste
Probably going to deliver our next batch of “N95” masks from China….imagine the amount of fire supplies that the ’47 could deliver
Not a waste…issues it couldn’t deliver in the fire world….just a new mission
Totally dumb. There’s freighters out there bud that already do that.
Bigger is better! Not all the time
4.5 loads 🤔
And of course, people who have no idea what they’re talking about are letting others know how it should be.
Damn, how I wish I was that smart on monday am!
B210 just showed up here in northeastern Minnesota, USA, to help fight a raging new fire that sprang from its start to 1500+ acres within 24 hours. The Greenwood Fire is being driven from wildland towards a nearby developed area by 10–15 mph winds gusting to 2025 while everything here is tinder dry. These winds have also whipped up some of our other fires to bring them back to active status. It’s really great to have this resource available from down under to fight fires at our high northern latitudes. We’ve been having a lot of wildfires this season, but most have been very small … until this one got going on August 15.
I am no aviation expert, but my understanding is the B737 tanker, although smaller than the B747 tanker, is far more useful in that it can use smaller airports and shorter runways, than a B747 tanker.
The Boeing 737 it is capable of shorter take-off and landings (such as needed when fighting wildfires in more remote areas like northeastern Minnesota, where the airports here in Ely, Hibbing, and Brainard, MN, are to my knowledge not able to handle B747s). Now, I might be wrong about that, but that is my figurings.
That B737 is a “wide-bodied” long-wing-span, short-fuselage, work horse of an airplane.
Yup
Great piece of machinery til the MAX debacle
Look at some of the front nosewheel doors of some 737-800 series or thereabouts
Stenciled or painted….ETOPS
Engine Turns Or People Swim….
There’s ones aviation humor for the day…
Yes, I am talking about the older Boeing 737, NOT the newer 737-MAX.
The 737-MAX is the newer recent designed plane that ran into flight-control troubles, resulting in 2 crashes (I think), then was grounded by the FAA.
But, the original 737 is the workhorse plane.
Comments are closed for this article!