2019 fire season: large tankers on contract with US Forest Service

I knew that it was getting to that time of year when we would start seeing large air tankers on contract with the US Forest Service. So, I went to Bill Gabbert's Fire Aviation site to find out if he had posted about the 2019 large air tankers. My efforts were rewarded when I found hist April 15th article, updated on April 17th on 13 large air tankers under contract for 2019.

I know that many of you follow Bill's blogs, and you will already know about the13 large air tankers on exclusive use contracts with the US Forest Service in 2019; according to Bill it is likely that another five air tankers will be going on contract soon. As I do write about aerial wildland fire fighting, I think it is important for me to post about these exclusive use contracts for large air tankers.

Bill writes the following in his April 15th article on these 13 large air tankers:

Currently six of them have been activated according to the estimated starting dates of the Mandatory Availability Periods (MAP). On April 17 a seventh will begin. The rest will come on between May 1 and May 29. 

The 13 air tankers confirmed so far on exclusive use contracts for 2019 are:
• 10 Tanker Air Carrier: 910 and 912 (DC-10)
• Coulson: 131 (C-130Q)
• Aero Air: 101 and 107, (MD-87)
• Aero Flite: 160, 161, 163, and 167 (RJ85)
• Neptune: 01, 15, 16, and 40

You will want to read Bill's April 15th in its entirety to read about related issues.

If five additional large air tankers go on exclusive use contracts sometime soon, whatever that means, the 18 large tankers on exclusive use (EU) contract are not enough. The advantage of exclusive use contracts over call when needed (CWN) contracts is that air craft under exclusive use contracts are paid to be available during a contract specified mandatory availability period while call when needed aircraft are only paid when they are called up to be ready to fly and at a higher cost as compared with exclusive use aircraft.

In June of 2018, I wrote about my concerns over the decrease in air tankers and helicopters on contract to fly fires. I don't know the status of CWN contracts for 2019. My concerns remain the same this year. On June 8, 2018, I wrote in part:

Following up on Bill Gabbert’s comments on the higher costs and other concerns about the CWN contracts along with the reduction in available EU contracted aircraft, it is just a matter of time during this 2018 wildfire season when all EU contracted aircraft will be assigned to fires, so the call will go out for additional aircraft to work wildfires. So, the USFS asks those contractors on CWN contracts if they have available aircraft. As Bill points out in his February 21st [2018] article, the cost of aircraft under a CWN contract is higher than under an EU contract. It stands to reason that the contractors may try obtain other contracts for their CWN aircraft. Or perhaps, sadly, they haven’t other contracts, deciding that it costs too much to keep a CWN aircraft and crew ready to fly fires so the aircraft sits without a contract. What happens then? 

Not only does the CWN contractor have to have available aircraft, they also have to have available crew and maintenance personal. What happens if that crew can not afford to sit around with no pay waiting for the call to fly? Perhaps they get other flying jobs in the meantime. What happens then?

It is important to note that at this time, I do not know about the status of any CWN contracts that the US Forest Service might issue. If the number of available aircraft and crew on CWN contracts this year is lower than in 2018 then the scenario that I wrote about last year might be worse.  With a reduced number or no aircraft on CWN contracts in 2019, what happens once all available EU aircraft are assigned to a fire? Could a call go out for a large air tanker or a helicopter to work a fire with a response that none are available? What happens then?

USFS one-year air tanker contracts

Regular readers know that I follow Bill Gabbert's Wildfire Today  and Fire Aviation websites. I am sure that many of you follow Bill's websites. Those of you who are interested in staying current on the news affecting wildland fire fighting and fire aviation will want to follow his websites.  No doubt that some of you are already familiar with Bill's December 6th Fire Aviation article, "Forest Service moving to one-year contracts for air tankers." I hope that those of you who have not read Bill's article on the upcoming one-years contracts for air tankers will do so now, it is well worth the read and perhaps you will want to bookmark the article as I have done. I decided to make this post referencing this article that Bill wrote because I think the news of the upcoming one-year contracts for air tankers is important. I don't really have anything original to add, but I do want to reference a couple of points that he makes.

Those of you who are so inclined, may be interested in looking at the RFP solicitation that Bill linked to in his article. For your convenience, I am providing a link to this RFP solicitation found on the FBO website here. The RFP calls for a one-year contract for air tankers with options for four additional one-year contracts. I believe that the solicitation is calling for up to five large air tankers. Contracts will commence with the 2019 calendar year.

After reminding us about the overall decrease in air tankers from 44 in 2002 to 14 in 2018, Bill points to the difficulties this type of contract could pose to contractors seeking to add new air tankers to their fleet of air tankers:

Air tankers are very expensive to purchase and retrofit. Most of the jet-powered tankers being used today before being converted were retired from their original mission and are decades old  . . .  Most air tanker operators in the United States prefer to buy retired airliners like the BAe-146,  DC-10, or variants of the C-130 and convert them to carry and dispense retardant. Retrofitting alone runs into the millions. Few if any vendors can simply write a check to purchase and convert an air tanker, so they have to convince a lender to give them large sums of money usually even before they have a contract with the USFS. With this new one-year contract policy, obtaining those funds could be even more difficult. (Bill Gabbert, Forest Service moving to one-year contracts for air tankers)

You will want to read Bill's article for more information and analyses.

I remain concerned about the smaller number of large air tankers on exclusive-use contracts. I am very cautiously hopeful that, if awarded, this solicitation could result in up five additional large air tankers on contract in 2019. However, as Bill points out, the USFS has the option of not exercising its option to contract for these large air tankers in years two through five.

I am sure that Bill will do his usual good job in following the status of this solicitation and any resulting awards. I will be following Bill's Fire Aviation website for developments and hope that you do as well

Reflections: not enough firefighting air tankers and helicopters

If you have not been following Bill Gabbert’s articles on Fire Aviation about the decrease in the number of air tankers on an exclusive use (EU) contract with the USFS in 2018, I hope you take a few moments to read Bill's February16th article, "Air tankers to be cut by one-third in 2018", if not now the after you finish this article. Bill writes that there were 20 air tankers on an exclusive use contract with the USFS in 2017. In 2018 there will only be 13 heavy air tankers on exclusive use contracts with the United States Forest Service (USFS). There will be air tankers on call when needed (CWN) contracts with the USFS but at a higher cost.

And the decrease in aerial resources on exclusive use contracts does not stop with large air tankers. Bill reports that the number of type 1 helicopters on exclusive use contracts will be lower, I do not know if there will be any type 1 helicopters on CWN contracts. Exclusive use contracts for the two super scoopers are not being renewed, and the USFS program to convert USCG C-130s to aerial firefighting configuration may be discontinued.

I don’t know about you, but I find this quite alarming. Yes, as Bill reports, there will be air tankers on call when needed contracts with the USFS, but at an increased cost. I do not think that my concerns are original. But I want to express my concerns as a show of support to those in the business of flying wildfires under federal contracts.

Following up on Bill Gabbert’s comments on the higher costs and other concerns about the CWN contracts along with the reduction in available EU contracted aircraft, it is just a matter of time during this 2018 wildfire season when all EU contracted aircraft will be assigned to fires, so the call will go out for additional aircraft to work wildfires. So, the USFS asks those contractors on CWN contracts if they have available aircraft. As Bill points out in his February 21st article, the cost of aircraft under a CWN contract is higher than under an EU contract. It stands to reason that the contractors may try obtain other contracts for their CWN aircraft. Or perhaps, sadly, they haven’t other contracts, deciding that it costs too much to keep a CWN aircraft and crew ready to fly fires so the aircraft sits without a contract. What happens then?

Not only does the CWN contractor have to have available aircraft, they also have to have available crew and maintenance personal. What happens if that crew can not afford to sit around with no pay waiting for the call to fly? Perhaps they get other flying jobs in the meantime. What happens then?

Wildfire activity can occur any time of year. Perhaps a State has State-contracted aircraft to augment their State-owned aircraft during a spring, summer, or fall wildfire season (aka designated wildfire season). They may also have arrangements to use State-based National Guard aerial resources during times of high fire activity.  Sometimes these wildfires, even those that occur after the designated wildfire season, can be bought under control without needing put out a call for federal aviation resources. For example, in New Jersey, where I live, in recent years wildfires occurring outside of the designated wildfire season have been brought under control without the need to request USFS tankers or type 1 helicopters. It is just a matter of time before there will be a very large wildfire in New Jersey or elsewhere in the Northeast that “require” federal tankers and type 1 helicopters. The State could put out the call for such aircraft, it is likely that none will be available. What happens then?

Speaking of “State-owned” and State-contracted aircraft, what happens in States where for some reason there is a shortage of such aircraft used in firefighting. What happens then?

There are not enough heavy tankers and type 1 helicopters on EU contracts. As I write this, the status of the SEAT contracts are unknown. No scoopers, and perhaps the USFS program to convert CoastGuard C-130s to firefighting configuration will be discontinued. There are not enough aerial resources to fight wildfires. With the possibility of worsening droughts in parts  of the country, I am afraid of what I’ll happen. More wildfires and not enough aircraft?


Further reading, you will want to read the February 21st article and comment, Shrinking the Fleet on the Associated Aerial Firefighters website to read about the reduction in the number of air tankers on USFS exclusive use contracts.