Up close with the AT-802 with the help of Queen Bee: AT-802F cockpit

Here are some shots of the cockpit of the AT-802F courtesy of the wonderful folk at Queen Bee! Note that this a single-seat cockpit. A word on the AmSafe Airbag Harness, as I understand it this harness will deploy an airbag, for more information go here.

There are a couple of different models of the AT-802. The AT-802's equipped for agricultural "crop-dusting" spraying equipment are: the AT-802 (single-seat cockpit). The aerial fire fighting AT-802 is known as the AT-802F. Air Tractor makes a double-seat cockpit version of both models, designated by the letter "A". See this webpage for information on the AT-802 models.

Here are links on specifications and performance for the AT-802F. For those of you who want a more detailed discussion, I refer you to a couple of posts I made one year ago on the AT-802F (updated as appropriate) here and here.

Click on the image above for an enlarged and more readable version of the AT-802F dimensional drawings (courtesy of Air Tractor).

Up close with the AT-802 with the help of Queen Bee: About Queen Bee

Queen Bee Air Specialties has been in business for 45 years, and owned by the Kemper family for 33 years. Queen Bee has air tanker (SEAT) contracts with both national and state agencies. In addition, they have been an authorized Air Tractor Dealer since 1984, sell Air Tractor parts,  and perform maintenance services on Air Tractors. Information on Queen Bee's pilot flight training program may be found here.

Queen Bee's air tanker fleet consists of nine AT-802's, all of which are type III air tankers. Tankers are classified into four types based on retardant capacity (in gallons). A type III tanker has a capacity of 800 to 1,799 gallons of retardant (or suppressant). See page 52 of the Interagency Aerial Supervision Guide for more information on tanker classification. More information on Queen Bee's AT-802's see their web page on air tanker operations.

I've had the privilege of chatting with a couple of the staff at Queen Bee about their operations and the AT-802. They have been generous with their time and in providing me with some photographs, including the ones that I included here.

Thanks to my friends at Queen Bee for the photos!

Stay tuned for my next post where I will revisit specifications of the AT-802.

Up close with AT-802 with the help of Queen Bee: introduction

When I first began writing about aerial wildland fire fighting almost one year ago, I was interested in the aviation resources used by the New Jersey Forest Fire Service -- single engine airtankers (SEATs) and UH-1H Huey helicopters. So, after writing about Huey helicopters, I wrote about the different types of SEATS used in aerial wildland firefighting: AgCat aka FireCat, Dromader M-18, Ayers Thrush, and the Air Tractor AT-802, and the Air Tractor models 402, 502, and 602. Air Tractor is also in the process of developing a larger fire fighting SEAT, the AT-1002.

What I did not fully appreciate at the time I wrote those articles is that the smaller Air Tractor models, in particular the AT-502 and 602 play a role in agricultural applications as well as fire fighting. In addition, at the time I wrote those early articles, I may not have mentioned that SEATs fall into one of two tanker classifications dependent on the size of their retardant tanks. SEATs with tanks holding 799 gallons of retardant or less are called type IV tankers. SEATs with tanks holding 800 gallons fall into the type III classification.

As time went on my appreciation for the role of SEATs in aerial wildland firefighting grew. While I don't know specific details of states other than NJ, I do know that other states have SEATs on state contracts during fire fighting season. I hope to write more about the role of SEATs in fighting fires in my own state later this year.

It didn't take much time for me to learn that SEATs play a very important role in initial attack as well as being able to maneuver in spaces where larger tankers can not. Another advantage is shorter runway requirements and the ability to work from mobile "temporary" bases set up near a fire with mobile retardant mixing and loading trailers.

For sometime know, I have been wanting to go back and write more about SEATs. I am going to write about the type III SEATs. I hope to spend some time with the type IV SEATs later this year. With the single engine AT-1002 still under development, I believe that only type III SEAT is the AT-802 with an 800 gallon retardant tank. So, I begin with that AT-802.

When I wrote about the AT-802 last February I was looking for some more information about how these airplanes were used in firefighting. One of my air tanker pilot friends referred me to the Queen Bee Air Specialties website because Queen Bee is an Air Tractor dealer and they are active in aerial wildland firefighting. Queen Bee is one of several SEAT aviation companies holding national SEAT contracts.

Since I was already familiar with Queen Bee through their website, when I decided that I wanted to write more about the AT-802 contacting Queen Bee seemed like a good place to start. I was aided in this by a friend who put me in touch with the folk at Queen Bee.

I want to say here that I have the highest respect for all operators of aerial wildland firefighting aircraft, including but not limited to SEAT operators. As time goes on, I hope to have the opportunity to correspond with other SEAT operators in the future.

My focus in this series of articles, still being developed, is twofold. First, I hope to get up close and personal with the AT-802 with the help of the folk at Queen Bee. In the course of doing so, I will be writing about Queen Bee.

Air Tractor 1002 Test plane

I came across this video of the new AT-1002 a few weeks ago, and am posting it here. I believe that is a test plane. The only detail I know is that it has a 1,000 gallon retardant tank. According to the information from youtube, the pilot is chief test pilot Troy Vaught.

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: Reflections

With this post, I wrap my series on Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR. The first seven articles in this series were posted from January 4 to 13, 2010. I offer this short piece of fiction as my reflections.

I am a home owner out in the west (U.S.) and there is a wildland fire burning near by. There is no fog near my house. Maybe I am wondering if I am going to have to evacuate. I can see some smoke and the flames but no, there isn't any fog. And whatever winds there are, they aren't much. Maybe 5 mph. I'm preoccupied and somewhat anxious, so I'm not thinking that the usual tanker base tankers fly out of is fogged in. I'm wondering where they are. No winds to ground the tankers. It's getting on to mid-morning and they are usually here by now. Where are they?

I am getting restless. Maybe I'll turn on my radio and listen to a weather report and I'll hear something about fog in some areas of the region. I hope that I will take a breath, sit down, and know that the tankers will get here, it is probably taking them longer to get here because their base might be fogged in.

Ok, I'll wait. I know that the ground crews are out doing what they can, trying to build and hold the line. I can just make out the lights from the engines on the ridge on the other side of the valley below my house. Off in the distance I think I see a helo. There looks to be something hanging from its belly, I think it is a snorkel. Probably getting water from the pond in the park. So, if a helo is out there is hope.

I wait some more. They are here. I see one on the ridge. And another. They are late, but they are here.

I remember the fire several years ago. Woke up one morning to see the smoke hanging in the air down in the valley. I didn't see any tankers or helos over the valley that day. I figured that if I couldn't see into the that they couldn't see either. The guy on the radio said they were inversions. Back then I wasn't all that familiar with the term inversions. Now I am

No inversions today. I can see the valley and the flames. Oh, there is another tanker making a drop. I bet the ground crews are happy to see you! Thank-you tanker pilots and crew!

Toussaint L'Ouverture International Airport (MTPP): update on 1/16/2010 @ 11:15 AM EST

I found two FAA advisories dated Jan. 16, 2010 (005, 007) updating the situation at MTPP. The ground stop at Toussaint L'Ouverture International Airport (MTPP) was canceled late yesterday (EST). I am copying relevant portions of the text of FAA advisories 005 and 007 date 1/16/2010 and one of the notams (notices to airmen) referred to in advisory 007.

A word on the notam, from what I understand from my pilot friends, the FAA often issues multiple notams with the same wording to ensure that the notice gets out to all affected parties. In this case there are three notams all saying that the "U.S. Government has established temporary air traffic flow management procedures for flights into MTPP."

ATCSCC ADVZY 005 DCC 01/15/2010 HAITI UPDATE
MESSAGE: THE GROUND STOP FOR TRAFFIC DESTINED MTPP HAS BEEN CANCELED. THIS ADVISORY SUPERSEDES ALL PREVIOUS ISSUED FAA COMMAND CENTER ADVISORIES CONCERNING OPERATIONS AT PORT AU PRINCE - MTPP AIRPORT. ALL AIRCRAFT OPERATING INTO MTPP MUST COMPLY WITH NOTAMS 0/1856 AND 0/1857. THE FAA COMMAND CENTER CRISIS MANAGEMENT CENTER RECOVERY DESK WILL REMAIN STAFFED AND BE AVAILABLE FOR INFORMATION DISSEMINATION AND ASSISTANCE.
EFFECTIVE TIME: 160030 - 160559
SIGNATURE: 10/01/16 00:31

ATCSCC ADVZY 007 DCC 01/15/2010 HAITI UPDATE NOTAM CLARIFICATION
MESSAGE: ALL AIRCRAFT OPERATING INTO MTPP MUST COMPLY WITH NOTAMS ZZZ 0/1856, FDC 0/1857 OR KFDC A0001/10.
EFFECTIVE TIME: 160050 - 160559
SIGNATURE: 10/01/16 00:51

NOTAM Request for: KFDC A0001/10
KFDC A0001/10 KFDC - .. SPECIAL TEMPORARY ACCESS PROCEDURES FOR MTPP .. AT THE REQUEST OF ICAO AND HAITI'S NEIGHBORING STATES IN SUPPORT OF EARTHQUAKE RELIEF OPERATIONS, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS ESTABLISHED TEMPORARY AIR TRAFFIC FLOW MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES FOR FLIGHTS INTO MTPP. ALL FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT FLYING TO MTPP ARE REQUIRED TO BE ON AN ACTIVE IFR FLIGHTPLAN AND PRIOR TO DEPARTURE OBTAIN ARRIVAL SLOT TIMES FROM THE HAITI FLIGHT OPERATIONS COORDINATION CENTER. ARRIVAL SLOT TIMES ARE VALID +/- 20 MINUTES OF THE SCHEDULED ARRIVAL TIME. IF UNABLE TO MEET SCHEDULED ARRIVAL SLOT TIMES, CONTACT THE HAITI FLIGHT OPERATIONS COORDINATION CENTER OR YOUR CONTROLLING AGENCY TO COORDINATE NEW SLOT TIMES. DEPARTURES FROM MTPP MUST COMPLY WITH NORMAL ATC PROCEDURES. ALL OPERATORS ARE ADVISED THAT FUEL AND OTHER GROUND SUPPORT SERVICES MAY BE UNAVAILABLE. 16 JAN 00:01 2010 UNTIL UFN. CREATED: 15 JAN 23:54 2010

Toussaint L'Ouverture (MTPP): update 12:10 PM EST

Delays by Destination:

* Due to NO RAMP SPACE, departure traffic destined to MTPP airport will not be allowed to depart until at or after 19:00 UTC.

It seems that the problems of no ramp space at MTPP continues. Not surprising. Instead of posting these every two hours, I'll monitor on my own, and touch base on this tomorrow. In the meantime, those of you who are interested in following the status of MTPP can go to the map on this FAA webpage and click on any of the airports to see the FAA notices of delays be destination.

Toussaint L'Ouverture (MTPP): update 10:30 AM EST

Delays by Destination:

* Due to NO RAMP SPACE, departure traffic destined to MTPP airport will not be allowed to depart until at or after 17:00 UTC.

Ground stop continues at Toussaint L'Ouverture

I just checked the the FAA webpage that I wrote about last night and found that there is a ground stop on flights to Toussaint L'Ouverture International Airport (MTPP) until 15:00 UTC (3 PM) or 10 AM EST.

Delays by Destination:

* Due to NO RAMP SPACE, departure traffic destined to MTPP airport will not be allowed to depart until at or after 15:00 UTC.

Toussaint L'ouverture International Airport: 1/14/10 @ 11 PM

I went to the Aviation Week website and found two updates on conditions at Toussaint L'ouverture International Airport (MTPP) in Port Au Prince.

1. In this article, James Ott of Aviation Week reports that crews from the U.S. are assisting Haitians in staffing a remote temporary Control Tower serving MTPP. Ott reports that only 12 ramp positions were available at the airport. He reports on other difficulties faced by humanitarian flights into MTPP today.

2. Paul McLearly writes about the important role played by the U.S. Air Force's 23^rd Tactics Special Tactics Squadron, 720^th Special Tactics group a late afternoon post to the Defense Technology Blog at Aviation Week. He writes:

The 720th, based out of Hurlburt Field, Fla. is a force designed to be rapidly deployed to provide the tactical ground-to-air communications required to link up air assets with special operations missions on the ground, and in Haiti, they’re running the show until more help arrives.

Speaking with reporters on a conference cal this afternoon, Lt. Col. Brett J. Nelson, Commander of the 23^rd / 720^th; said that when his team arrived, “the airfield from a structural perspective was in good condition, but… there were uncontrolled operations going on there for at least twenty-four hours prior to our arrival, so it was in quite a state of disarray on the ramp in particular. The first priority was to get that efficiently organized in some way and we continue to work that effort.”

According to Lt. Col. Nelson, there were as many as 44 aircraft on the ground at the airport this afternoon being unloaded and taking on evacuees. See the article for more information on the work of 720^th.

damaged port slows aid efforts in Haiti

FAA has ground stop on flights to Toussaint L'ouverture Inter. Airport

Much thanks to one of my pilot friends who helped me find some info from the FAA website confirming a CNN report that I saw earlier that flights to Toussaint L'Ouverture International Airport (MTPP) have been suspended. I looked around, but could not find confirming information from the FAA until my friend pointed me in the right direction.

Here is what my friend pointed me to. If you go to this FAA webpage, you will see a map of the country showing some of the major airports. The purpose being so you can easily find flight delay information. So, I clicked on the dot for Miami International Airport,and saw this information:

Delays by Destination:
* Due to AIRBORNE INVENTORY, departure traffic destined to MTPP airport will not be allowed to depart until at or after 01:00 UTC.

I clicked on the dots for several other airports, Newark, Washington International, Teterboro, Logan in Boston and saw the same information. You can also find this same information on Flight Aware's webpage for MTTP (Toussaint L'Ouverture International Airport), this page may be found here.

As I write this, it is a almost 7:30 PM EST, which means it is 12:30 AM in London. If I am thinking about this correctly, UT is universal time where UT is the time at the Greenwich meridian which runs through Greenwich England. I've been to Greenwich and its observatory, it is across the Thames River from London. If you are interested, go here for information on the current time in time zones around the world.

Update on aviation situation in Haiti (1/14/10, 3:40 PM)

Christopher Fotos of Aviation Week's Things with Wings Commercial Aviation Blog, posted an an article with links to reports from the Wall Street Journal on the opening of the Toussaint Louverture International Airport and other relief efforts, and the relief efforts of American Airlines. In addition to the information provided by Things with Wings, I just found a NY Times articles with more aviation related information.

According to this Wall Street Journal article, troops from the U.S. Southern Operations Command led efforts to repair the quake damaged Air Traffic Control Tower at the Toussaint Louverture International Airport (MTPP). The good news is that MTPP is now open for 24/7 operations. The article also reports on the deployment of other relief teams from the U.S. and elsewhere.

For an update on the relief efforts on American Airlines go here (another Wall Street Journal article). As I reported earlier today, American Airlines efforts are restricted to the very important role of flying in supplies and equipment, notably water, food, and other supplies. They are unable to fly in passengers at the moment.

Unfortunately, while MTPP is open, there are other problems at the airport as reported by this NY Times article. To summarize, airplanes are backed up at MTPP, both on the ground and in the air. The airport is crowded with civilian and military aircraft on the ground, some waiting to be unloaded. Additional airplanes, including cargo transports are stacked in the air waiting to land on the one runway. There are also reports of shortages of aviation fuel, the result being that some aircraft are unable to leave because of these aviation fuel shortages. The article also discusses problems arising from the damage to the seaport, and difficulty in travel by road in and around Port Au Prince including travel by ground out of the airport.

copyright 2010 K. Tyler Miller

Haiti Earthquake: focusing on aviation

I am sure that most of you have been following the tragic earthquake that has wrought untold devastation and loss of life on Haiti. Because I write about aviation, I was curious about the status of the airport near Port Au Prince, so I did some checking this morning. And while I was at it, I came across some reports about the response of the General Aviation community and the Commercial Airlines in the U.S. I end with a list of internet sites, aviation and others, that I have looked at this morning.

This airport, the Toussaint Louverture International Airport, has one asphalt runway (10/28) that is approximately 9,974 feet long. More information about the Toussaint Louverture International Airport (MTPP) may be found here.

From what I understand from various media reports, the Air Traffic Control Tower at MTPP either collapsed or has seen significant damage. The United States is assisting in efforts to provide air traffic control to relief flights bound for MTPP. Some time during the day yesterday, the Haitian Aviation Authority issued what is known as a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), restricting flights to relief flights (emergency aid, equipment, supplies, and emergency personnel). See for example this report from Aviation Week.

Power is out in many areas in Haiti. I wonder about the status of the runway lighting and the electric supply elsewhere at MTPP. I also wonder about the navigational aides in and around MTPP. and I expect that this means that runway lighting at MTPP is affected. Then there are the navigational aides in or near the MTPP airport, between power outages and other disruption to radio communications; I suspect that these navigational aides are, at the very least, unreliable. Of course, these are my own speculations, as I have not seen specific reports addressing either the runway lights at MTPP or the status of their navigational aides.

Reuters is reporting here about the response of American Commercial Airlines. General Aviation is helping out also, as reported by the AOPA here.

There is a second international airport in Haiti, Cap-Haitien International Airport (MTCH). For more specific information about this airport, including runway length (4,886 ft), go here. I am uncertain about the status of this airport, so I don't know if there was any earthquake related damage. It is located in the northeastern portion of the country.

For those of you who are interested, here are some sites that I checked out this morning in regards to the earthquake. The first two are aviation specific. I have also included some links to maps, and finally links to a couple of wildfire related blogs that I follow, both of whom have written about the earthquake.

1. Aviation Week, with news report, links to blogs, and the like. I do not subscribe to the Aviation Week periodical, so I suspect that there is information that I don't have access to. However, there is much that I have been able to access on this site in the past. At least one of their writers is writing about the earthquake.

2. Aviation News Today provides a variety of links to external media sources on the latest news affecting the aviation community. I got the Reuters report mentioned earlier from this site.

3. The U.S. Geologic Service has a page of various maps devoted to the Haiti quake on this webpage..

4. A google map (where you can zoom in) may be found here.

5. Ramblings of a Chief Officer is writing about the earthquake, see for example this article where he writes about U.S. emergency responders.

6. Bill Gabbert of Wildfire Today is also writing about the earthquake, for example see this article.

I'll get back to my final post in my series on Flying Fires -- Fog, smoke and VFR or IFR in a few days. I'll try to keep abreast of aviation concerns related to the earthquake in Haiti and report back here.

Update: Jan 14 11:30 AM. Just found this CNN article providing updated information about the role of U.S. Airlines in earthquake relief in Haiti. Apparently, the role of the relief efforts of U.S. Airlines, for example Jet Blue and American Airlines, is limited to flying in supplies and other equipment to aid in relief. They are not able to fly in passengers, including relief workers (physicians and nurses), at this time. The CNN article cited above is also reporting the following:

U.S. Embassy staff at the Port-au-Prince airport said the tower and the lights were working, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Wednesday.

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: Fires and IFR

Departures

It is rare these days for a tanker to depart in IFR conditions with a load of retardant. We used to do it all the time and it is quite dangerous. After a few years, I refused to depart IFR with a load. The problem comes with the eventual emergency (engine failure,hydraulic failure, fire on board etc.) You have to pitch the load (or crash) and you can't see what you are dropping on. It could be a highway, a house or kids in a play ground. Then there is the very real problem of not being able to get back into the airport you just took off from because it is fogged in. Now you have to fly to your
alternate, IFR with an emergency on board. It's a terrible combination (G, former air tanker pilot).

So what are the options here? You are called to fly a fire, but your base is fogged in. Yes, you are an IFR rated pilot, as is your tanker. One option is to fly empty, under IFR if necessary, to another base with better weather and VFR conditions to load retardant and then fly to the fire under VFR.

Ok, going back to IFR for a moment, the book calls for what is know as a minimum altitude of 2,000 ft above the terrain. You can get down to 1,000 ft above the terrain and lower during an IFR-ILS approach. Consider the air tanker base in Missoula, Montana. Missoula is surrounded by mountains. One of the departure routes out of Missoula, Konna two departure, requires a 350 ft per nautical mile climb. G, who used to fly a P-2, tells me that translates to 1,050 ft per minute climb rate in a P-2 to meet the departure requirements. He goes on to explain what this means:

That's nothing for a modern jet airliner, but a tired old recip with an engine out would be hard pressed to make that kind of climb rate (1,050 per minute). The Missoula One Departure (another departure route out of Missoula) requires 400 ft per nautical mile or 1,200 ft per minute to safely get out of that valley without running into a mountain. Doing even an empty departure in IFR minimums out of a place like Missoula is asking for a whole heap of trouble if you lose an engine. You may not be able to meet the minimum climb gradient with an engine out. In 2000, flying out of Missoula in less than a mile visibility in smoke forced me to change my personal limits. I did it for a couple of weeks and then I decided this is nuts, so I refused. It's the whole idea of 'is this fire really worth injury or death to a civilian on the ground or losing a flight crew and tanker?'

Lives are not expendable.

IFR at fires?

Flying around the fire in smokey IFR is just a guess. There is no Air Traffic Control (ATC) that will even pretend to talk to you if you are that close to the ground. (G)

Remember the 2,000 foot minimum terrain separation that I was talking about earlier? I've covered retardant drops by tanker in other articles, and the tankers are flying at low altitudes when making the drop. Much lower than 2,000 feet above ground level. An inversion can trap smoke from a wildland fire under its lid. Of course smoke can be a problem over a fire without an inversion. A tanker flying in smokey IFR to drop retardant on a fire? Can you even drop the retardant where it needs to go without injuring someone on the ground? Can you drop the retardant without running yourself into the ground or clipping a tree with your wings? So sometimes smokey conditions at a fire can shut down an airshow.

Lives are not expendable.

Fog, remember fog? Fog over a fire might shut down an airshow but fog over a fire is good news for the firefighter on the ground because the moisture in the air aids in suppression efforts

_____________________________


Note (added July 2012): I'd like to thank a couple of my tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with as I was preparing the articles in this series for their time and help. Here is a complete list of articles in this series with hyperlinks:

1. Introduction (Jan 4)
2. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
3. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
4. Fog (Jan 11)
5. Inversions (Jan 12)
6. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
7. Reflections (Jan 18)

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: Inversions

Cold air is denser and heavier than warm air, so cold air sinks and warm air rises.

In a normal airmass, the air cools as altitude is increased. That is, the air is cooler aloft, and helps to move smoke and pollutants out of valleys. An inversion is the opposite of a normal airmass. In an inversion the air aloft is warmer then the air near the ground. Remember that cold air sinks, so the warm air aloft acts like a trap door, trapping the cool air below.

If the airmass is holding enough moisture, fog will form in the inversion because the temperature of the air near the ground is at or near the dewpoint. Smoke and pollutants sitting near the surface are trapped in an inversion.

Like clouds and fog, inversions inhibit visibility, hampering VFR operations.

_____________________________


Note (added July 2012): I'd like to thank a couple of my tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with as I was preparing the articles in this series for their time and help. Here is a complete list of articles in this series with hyperlinks:

1. Introduction (Jan 4)
2. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
3. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
4. Fog (Jan 11)
5. Inversions (Jan 12)
6. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
7. Reflections (Jan 18)

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: Fog

Low clouds that form below 6,500 feet above ground level often reduce visibility thus making VFR flight impossible. There are different types of clouds, forming at different altitudes. If you read a book geared for student pilots, you are likely to find a discussion of different types of clouds. I am not going discuss these different types of clouds here, but if you are interested, NOAA has a nice website on cloud classification that may be found here. For a discussion of cloud types for aviators, The FAA's Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge is available online. Their chapter on weather, which is found in chapter 11, includes a nice discussion of cloud types with some nice pictures.

Low clouds, those that form below 6,500 above ground level (agl) often reduce visibility making VFR flight impossible. Fog is one type of low cloud, and I am going to discuss fog in a little more detail. Fog typically forms when the air temperature near the ground is at or near the dew point. The dew point is the temperature at which the air can hold no more moisture. I found out recently that there are five, no six types of fogs. For those of you who are familiar with discussions of fog, I am using the six types of fogs as referenced in the glossary (under F) of weather terms from the Mt. Holly office of the National Weather Service.

I'll start with the sixth type of fog, ice fog. Ice fog forms in very cold temperatures, e.g. 25 to 30 degrees (F) below zero. It forms in conditions similar to radiation fog (below). Because it forms in such cold climates, ice fog is generally not a factor in aerial wildland fire fighting.

Radiation fog frequently forms at night when the ground is still warm and moist radiates against cold air near the surface. It frequently forms in mountain valleys. As the sun rises and the temperature increases, the radiation fog burns off.

Advection fog forms somewhere else, usually over water when warm air moves over the cooler surface. Wind moves the fog over land.

Sea fog occurs when a very cold and dry airmass moves over warmer water. As the water evaporates, it rises forming fog. Sea fog is then moved along by the wind. Sea fog is sometimes referred to as sea smoke or steam fog.

After a heavy rain, often near a warm front, precipitation or rain induced fog will form. In this case, the atmosphere is saturated with moisture and little if any cooling is required. G, a former air tanker pilot and certified flight instructor offers this observation about precipitation induced fog:

These are the "water dogs" seen rising out of the tree tops after a heavy rain. They are frequently mistaken as smoke by over zealous look-outs in the forest.

The final type of fog is upslope fog. It forms when a moist airmass is forced uphill by wind and the up sloping topography found in areas such as hills and mountain ranges. As the air expands and is forced uphill into the cooler air upslope, the airmass cools to the dew point forming fog.

Why are these different types of fog important to aviators? G explains:

The reason you might want to know the six reasons fog will form is so that you can predict it and decide if its potential will affect the safety of your flight. Fog is fog, but it forms in very predictable circumstances. For example, "It rained like hell this morning, but it is clear and calm this evening. I think I'll go up for a sunset flight and just have some fun." That little scenario is setting you up to where you might not be able to land back at your home port because it fogs in while you are up enjoying the sunset. Did you bring along enough gas to get to a safe place to land? That alternate airport might be a long way away.

_____________________________


Note (added July 2012): I'd like to thank a couple of my tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with as I was preparing the articles in this series for their time and help. Here is a complete list of articles in this series with hyperlinks:

1. Introduction (Jan 4)
2. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
3. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
4. Fog (Jan 11)
5. Inversions (Jan 12)
6. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
7. Reflections (Jan 18)

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: IFR, I can't see but I have instruments

IFR aka instrument flight rules, means that the pilot can not see because conditions are below the minima to allow for visual flight rules. Literally.

A few months ago, I purchased a small scanner and began finding and then listing to the radio frequencies used by near by air traffic. Most of these conversations are one-sided, pilots only, because air traffic control is too far away for my little scanner to pick up. One day soon after I got my scanner, there was a pretty significant rain storm going on. It was clear to me that the pilots I was listening to were not able to see, so had to be flying under IFR. One pilot came over the scanner asking "what's going on down there?" Meaning she may have been asking the controller what she might expect when she reached her destination airport. Or perhaps she was just curious. I could not hear the controllers response, but did hear her say thank-you. A short time later, I heard another pilot ask the same question.

I recently found out IFR student pilots use special glasses where the lateral and forward vision is clouded leaving only clear vision for the instruments. One brand name is foggles. Unless they cheat, wearing foggles means that they can not see out side the cockpit, and must rely on their instruments. Of course, the plane must have IFR instruments that include navigation equipment, one example being a Garmin GPS.

Flying under IFR means that you can fly a plane in or above the clouds. You navigate by flying from way station to way station. Each way station is assigned a specific radio frequency. As I understand it, the pilot tunes the navigation equipment, e.g. garmin GPS, to that radio frequency. Using the instruments in the plane you fly towards that way station. When you pass that way station, you get the frequency for the next way station from your flight plan, which may be on a knee board in your lap and fly towards that way station.

Finally, you are ready to approach the airport where you will land, with what is known as an ILS (instrument landing system) runway. You continue to fly from way station to way station until you reach the assigned frequency for the final runway approach. You pop out of IFR at about 200 feet above the runway, on final approach. When you pop out of IFR, you will be lined up with the extended center line of the runway. (Yes, there is a line down the middle of the runway.) Since you are already lined up with the extended center line of the runway, you do not have to maneuver at low altitude. You make the actual landing under VFR. Many GPS devices used in IFR planes will have these ILS approach plates loaded into memory, when you pass one way station, the GPS finds the next way station from memory and so on up to and including the final ILS approach.

I learned about these way stations, by the way, by listening to my scanner. I often listen to the band used by planes approaching and preparing to fly through the NY airspace in the vector over my house. To give you some perspective, I live on the edge of the class B airspace surrounding Newark-Liberty International Airport. Thanks to my copy of the sectional map covering this airspace, I learned that one of these way stations is located only a few miles from my house.

_____________________________

Note (added July 2012): I'd like to thank a couple of my tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with as I was preparing the articles in this series for their time and help. Here is a complete list of articles in this series with hyperlinks:

1. Introduction (Jan 4)
2. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
3. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
4. Fog (Jan 11)
5. Inversions (Jan 12)
6. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
7. Reflections (Jan 18)

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: VFR, I can see

Look at the term, visual flight rules (VFR), it means that pilots can see when minimum visibility requirements are met. These minimum visibility requirements (visual meteorological conditions) -- visibility, distance from clouds, ceiling -- vary by the class of airspace you are flying through.

I have read enough materials geared for student pilots to know that all pilots begin by flying under VFR. When pilots first obtain their private pilot's certificate, or sports pilots certificate they are restricted to flying under VFR. Some where along the line, I learned about "see and avoid". This means a pilot flying under VFR pays very little attention to the instruments in his/her plane. Rather they are constantly keeping their eyes focused on what is ahead. For example, you see another aircraft and avoid. Before flying you plan your route, looking at sectional maps where obstructions are mapped along with their height and plan to maintain a minimum required height above the obstruction (tall buildings, antennas, mountains, utility wires, etc.).

You may still be navigating using radio beacons or NavAids, but you can see. For example, charts used by VFR pilots in their flight planning may include charts depicting visual approaches to their destination airport. These charts will include a map and notations such as follow Route 3 (westbound) to Giants Stadium (west of NYC) where you turn north to make your visual approach to runway 1 at Teterboro NJ. Go here to download the chart, Cedar Grove Visual Rnwy 1, that I just described

Just about all planes that VFR pilots use have radio equipment. VFR pilots may be in contact with air traffic control, and when they are they are still seeing and avoiding.

Part of pre-flight planning is checking out weather forecasts to see if weather conditions will allow for VFR conditions along your planned route. Pre-flight planning also involves selecting alternate airports in case weather conditions at your primary airport do not allow for VFR landings. Of course, fog, clouds, etc. create conditions where VFR flight is not possible. These conditions are known as instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) because meteorological conditions -- visibility, ceiling, distance to clouds, etc. -- are below minima for visual meteorological conditions (VMC). IMC, even if there is no precipitation, will ground a VFR pilot. A pilot flying under VFR entering into IMC conditions can not see, meaning that pilots can not see obstructions in their flight path. This can have fatal consequences.

A pilot flying VFR must be flying in VMC in order to see.

________________________

Note (added July 2012): I'd like to thank a couple of my tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with as I was preparing the articles in this series for their time and help. Here is a complete list of articles in this series with hyperlinks:

1. Introduction (Jan 4)
2. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
3. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
4. Fog (Jan 11)
5. Inversions (Jan 12)
6. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
7. Reflections (Jan 18)

Flying Fires -- Fog, Smoke, and VFR or IFR: Introduction

My first memories of fog go back to our family vacations (long before the days of GPS) camping on the Maine coast. Fog was a not infrequent visitor to our corner of the Maine coast. We couldn't see. I still remember the sound of the fog horn from the light house on the island across the way. I knew that fog horn was important to marine interests because it warned of rock outcroppings, shoals, and the like that were shrouded by fog. I continued to run into fog as an adult, most of these encounters were inland. I always try to drive carefully when it is foggy.

I have a few second hand experiences with smoke as a hindrance to visibility, and these experiences. For several years I lived about four miles from an exit to the NJ Turnpike that was near the Hackensack Meadowlands in NJ. See the image below, look north of I-280 and west of the road marked 95 (actually the eastern spur of the NJ Turnpike). You will see a rather large undeveloped area, that is one portion of the Hackensack Meadowlands.

Every so often there would be fire in the Meadowlands that was bad enough to affect traffic on the NJ Turnpike, I-95, and I-280. There may have been traffic accidents on these interstates where smoke was a major player.

But fog, and smoke are not the only hindrance to visibility. Clouds are also a hindrance to visibility for aviation interests. Not having flown on a commercial airliner until I was about fifteen, I never gave much of a thought to clouds as a hindrance to visibility as a child/. I wasn't to fly again until I was in my early twenties. By that time, I saw that planes could and often did fly above the clouds. Sometimes we wouldn't pop out of the clouds until we were getting ready to land. I had a vague realization that the pilots were using instruments, combined with communications from air traffic controllers to navigate. As time went by, I picked up the vocabulary of visual flight rules (VFR) and instrument flight rules (IFR).

After I wrote my article on winds as affects aerial wildland fire fighting, I got interested in the question of fog and smoke as affects these aerial operations. After some e-mails with a couple of my tanker pilot friends, I knew that I had to begin this series by introducing VFR and IFR where I will provide an overview of each. I'd like to thank the tanker pilot friends whom I corresponded with for their help in this series of articles.

Here is a list of articles in this series (revised after the fact to include links to each article):

1. VFR, I can see (Jan 6)
2. IFR, I can't see but I have instruments (Jan 8)
3. Fog (Jan 11)
4. Inversions (Jan 12)
5. Flying fires: VFR or IFR? (Jan 13)
6. Reflections (Jan 18)

Great footage of Airtankers in action

Happy New Year everyone, a couple of days late. A friend told me about this very cool video of a P-3 Orion in action so I am sharing it with you today. Beautiful footage!

Tomorrow, I'll be starting a new series of articles on fog and other visibility concerns as applies to flying fires. Stay tuned.

Addendum: A couple of tanker pilot friends pointed out to me that much of the footage in this video is several years old. But it is a great montage of tanker footage. Enjoy!

Updated on August 3, 2015: The US Forest Service terminated its contract with Aero-Union for their Lockheed P-3's, going out of business a month later. (see my articles of July 30, 2011, August 17, 2011, and January 18, 2012). 

Tanker 9 - Flying in favorable winds

Some of you may remember that I wrote about the loss of tanker 9, a Lockheed P2V Neptune, several months ago. Just last night some e-mail came across my desk that provided me a poignant reminder of tanker 9 and her crew: Gene (Pilot), Gonzo (co-pilot), and Zach (flight engineer). One of the first things that I did this morning was to go back to that post (from April 2009) and watch that video, a nice photo montage of tanker 9 shot at Fox Field in 2007.

So, in memory of tanker 9 and her crew, please take about seven minutes and go here to watch this photo montage of tanker 9. The crew gave it their all. She is flying in favorable winds.

The embedded video shows another Lockheed P2V, tanker 7, taking off.