Why Not 24/7 Air Attack? (updated 11oct17)

George Rebane

Dropping fire suppressants from fixed and rotary wing aircraft is an extremely effective way to fight wildfires.  Living in the southern California mountains we annually witnessed how air attack kept little fires from becoming big, and big fires from going into populated areas.  In the 1993 Malibu fire, it was five or six heavy lift helicopters with big buckets that saved the community of Topanga with 8,000 housing units.  The demonstrated airmanship was awesome to behold as an orbit was established with the heavy lifters dropping sea water on the ridge where we lived that separated Topanga Canyon from Tuna Canyon as the four-day-old fire returned to consume the last few houses on the Tuna Cyn side as it tried to breach the ridge.  The heavy lifters soaked our ridge, climbing up Los Flores Cyn, dropping their loads (our cars got sea water rinses) with pinpoint accuracy, and then diving down through the narrow Tuna Cyn gorge with rock walls within a hundred feet of their rotors to the ocean to fill up and repeat the cycle.  With their skill and courage, those airmen saved an entire town (our ridge-top house included) in the Santa Monica Mtns.

Witnessing year after year how effective were the aircraft, many of us wondered why the operations had to shut down after sunset, and sometimes even when the smoke got too thick.  The answer given was always flight crew safety, it was not possible to fly when you couldn’t see the terrain.  But by the 1990s a lot of technology had already been developed that might mitigate that concern, and today that definitely appears to be the case.

So, I raised the question about 24/7 flight ops again to my professional aviator friends.  And to make sure that I don’t get anyone’s undies in a knot, I am not impugning the skill and courage of the flight crews, nor do I want them to take any more risks than they are already taking.  (For the techies, I don’t want them to undertake missions in which their probability of accident is any greater than it is today.)  But I am questioning the policies under which our wildfire air attack operations are designed, prepared, and executed.  And I am perfectly willing to be educated and accept any reasonable answer.

Here are some edited snippets of what I emailed my friends, all experienced aviators (military and commercial) as I framed the question to them, and am here inviting RR readers into this discussion.

A pertinent question gentlemen: Why do the air attack missions stop when the sun goes down?  I have asked this question for some years, and the answer always comes back as safety of the air crews, that in the dark they tend to fly into mountains.  Now I persist in this as someone not altogether unfamiliar with low altitude night missions carried out in the presence of terrible WX conditions (in enemy territory).

Back in the 1975-79 period I was designing in-cockpit computer driven displays that would enable low altitude attack aircraft to penetrate complex radar/missile defense layers through extremely difficult terrain (North Vietnam) and deliver (dumb bomb) munitions on pinpoint targets like bridges, radar sites, power plants, etc.  I worked hand-in-glove with the A-6 Intruder medium attack pilots at Whidbey Island NAS.  These very impressive guys flew lower than any wildfire air attack pilots I’ve seen living 25+ years in soCal mountains where my neighborhood burned annually - and the light attacks flew even lower during daylight often landing with “weeds in the undercarriage”.  The Navy attack pilots were an awesome bunch of aviators, and the A-6 crews were quite proud of flying such missions in zero/zero conditions without ever looking outside the cockpit.  But that was then (40+ years ago) and this is now. 

Today we have GPS that can keep an aircraft, flying Mach 1 or a slower highly maneuvering aircraft, within a 10-foot CEP.  And we have 3D terrain maps accurate to less than one foot in all directions.  And we have aircraft control algorithms that can nail the A/C’s 3D executed trajectory within its unique performance envelope.  And we can display the whole thing to ground control and the flight crew, including the exact 3D approach, drop trajectory, and release point(s) that the event commander requests.  And all of this without having to look outside the cockpit.

The guys at Whidbey flew these missions on a regular basis both in Vietnam and in the very cloudy and stormy Northwest.  So again, why do our air attack guys have to cease ops when the sun sets, and the winds die down (usually), and the fires continue to burn?  Given the effectiveness of air attack fire suppression and the horrendous annual cost of these fires, this should justify incorporating the kind of training and avionics required to successfully fly such missions 24/7.

I’m fairly certain that I’m not the only one who appreciates the capabilities of all-weather, day/night attack aircraft, and what they did then and can do today.  So, it must mean that I’m missing something very crucial in this scenario, and hence am prepared to sit humbly at the knee(s) of my betters for enlightenment.

As the northern California wildfires continue to rage with the awful stats in lives and properties lost already on the books, is it not time to revisit the question of 24/7 air ops?  And if there are material reasons why the policy should remain unchanged, then explain it to the public.  Else, let’s spend the money and expand the availability of this crucial tool for fighting the holocausts which occur annually with such regularity.

[update]  Given the expanding comment stream hereunder expanding to wildfire experiences, I want to reprise the major wildfire experience we had in the Santa Monica Mountains back in 1993 that I reference above.  It was documented in a three part series on these pages way back in 2007, starting here. 

[11oct17 update]  As more information comes in on the Sonoma, Napa, and Mendocino county fires, it appears to me that a 24/7 air attack capability may well have saved the hundreds of houses in the built up areas of towns like Santa Rosa.  Calfire reports that the flame front advanced on the town covering 16 miles in 6 hours, or at about 2.67mph which is a brisk walking speed.  The fire reached the town around 2am.  The fire fighting authorities saw it coming over a broad front in the middle of the night, but had no resources which could have stopped or slowed the wind-driven fire.  The only possible way to have stopped it would have been to create a broad band of non-flammable terrain between the fire front and the developed neighborhoods.  Laying down such fuel-denying bands is the job of air attack.  The alternative to that last Sunday night was simply to watch the flames advance while rushing in sparse and ineffective ground crews, and try to warn the residents to evacuate (which itself was not uniformly successful given the large number of people who received no warning at all).

Life, limb and emotional traumas aside, the damage that wildfires cause to properties in built-up areas ranges easily into the billions of dollars, and to continue fighting fires over an extended period costs additional hundreds of millions.  The obvious question that begs to be answered is how effectively could such losses be prevented and/or minimized if we maintained 24/7 air attack strike units at the ready during the annual fire seasons in ‘high value target areas’.  The annual downside costs occur reliably in western states, especially California.  I am not aware of any reports that detail or even acknowledge that a 24/7 air attack feasibility study has been done.  It seems to me that the political price to be paid for distributing the cost of losses over thousands of individuals and tens of jurisdictions is still not high enough to even bring the subject up for serious discussion.

Comments

[Walt]

Dr.R.. It's a whole different world when the Sun goes down.
From power lines, to a lone snag tree on a hilltop.
Even the expense of the best night vision hardware, it isn't worth the risk.
There may be some pilots out there with titanium balls, but they probably wind up in a smoking hole in the ground sooner than later.
There is no telling where the ground is,when everything is the same color of black.
Even construction at night brings on a new set of challenges. Usually we had to fix what we did in the dark, the next day.

[Barry Pruett]

Let me tell you George, I don’t know the rationale about night ops. What I do know is that the police and fire in his community are outstanding. We are grateful. They saved our house. The reality sunk in at 530a when we drove over Deer Creek and saw the fire raging on the next ridge. It was so close you could see the fire trucks which were right on top of the fire. Spectacular work by the firemen. This event is what they train for and they were awesome.

Once day light hit they stopped that fire dead in its tracks. The 747 came in and dropped near Deer Creek and it was done. We are grateful for our community with so many offers to house us while we are homeless. And The Union. Shame on those who continually bash The Union. Yubanet was not working well yesterday likely because of the bandwidth being exceeded. The site often times would not load. The Union had constant live coverage (their website, Facebook, Twitter) that was amazing and so reassuring to those of us who were desperate for information as we feared the loss of everything.

Information wise. The Union won the day. Hands down. Thank you to our police and fire. You are the best.

[George Rebane]

Gentlemen - I do believe you are missing my point. I am NOT impugning the professionalism and courage of the fire fighters, on the ground and in the air. And I do know about the "different world" after sundown. Please reread my commentary. I am simply inviting a discussion of the policy given today's technology.

[Walt]

Glad to hear your home is safe Barry. Yes, we have a good fire dept.
I was having flashbacks of the 49er fire. That was the "big one" for me. I had my fill that week.
Today, we have better tools and aircraft. Even the retardant is WAY better.
Glad to hear your safe. Keep it that way... (now to unload the bugout buggy.)

[Bill Tozer]

Well, according to the good tweekers in North San Juan, Sheriff Royal ordered the dumping of fire retardant on pot grows that were not harm’s way. Like, the good growers are experts on how to fight approaching flames.. Just imagine what the conspiracy theorists would say if our fine men and women who save our homes and property fought wildfires at night. Hmmm. I see a Midnight Chemrail conspiracy a’brewing. Fire retardant is used on illegal grows!! And legal ones!

FYI. Tiny point, barely worth mentioning. I once lived in a fine abode (rented) on a hilltop on La Tuna Canyon. Great view, could see out over the San Gabriel valley to the east, San Fernando Valley (parts) to the west, 5,000 foot Mt. Lukens two miles to the north, and the back side (uninhabited) of the Verdugo Range within a mile. Had deer, coyotes, and critters in my back yard on a daily basis. All the while the fine abode was considered living in the Los Angeles city limits.
With that said, it’s called La Tuna Canyon. Tiny point. La Tuna Cyn, not Tuna Cyn. Don’t need Jeffried to get his thong all soiled, ad if he needed another reason to do so, but I digress. Even a local La Tuna Cyn resident was called “The Tuna” for some unknown reason. She was puzzled by her nickname.
In the grand scheme of things, Tuna Cyn or La Tuna Cyn a very very tiny point. :)

If they ground all aircraft because some idiot is flying a drone with a camera attached in broad daylight, then I can’t imagine our air defense flying at night. Maybe they could fight fires on BLM/Federal Forests, or State Park lands at night.....far from civilization...the growers can hid under tarps or trash bags.

[Barry Pruett]

I am sorry George. I would never think that would be your intent. I am just commenting on what happened. We discussed the night ops issue last night. We are grateful for the firemen and they risk so much for us. We thought might it would be too dangerous. Thank you the insightful question.

As far as The Union’s number one critic. He is bitter for having been fired from the paper. All the other “experience” is negated by the lack of an ability to work with others. Pelline is a bitter asshole who can’t get over being fired from The Union. Fact one. Our local fire and police are the best. Fact two. The Union won the day yesterday hands down. Fact three. Pelline is still a tool.

[Walt]

Ya' got me all wrong Dr.R. Flying these hills at dark is bad enough, then add smoke to the mix,,, OH brother...

I recall this was talked about by calfire and the gov. a while ago, about lifting the "restrictions" of night flight. Something was mentioned about "it's up to the pilots"...
Now they are limited to about 10 hours in 24 of seat time.
At least that's what I have learned from listening to the scanner.

They still fly at night in the movies. (watch the movie "Always"..)

[fish]

Well, according to the good tweekers in North San Juan, Sheriff Royal ordered the dumping of fire retardant on pot grows that were not harm’s way. Like, the good growers are experts on how to fight approaching flames.. Just imagine what the conspiracy theorists would say if our fine men and women who save our homes and property fought wildfires at night. Hmmm. I see a Midnight Chemrail conspiracy a’brewing. Fire retardant is used on illegal grows!! And legal ones!

This is a problem for pot growers?

The material is called Phos-Chek. It is primarily made up of 85% water, 10% fertilizer (ammonia phosphate and sulfate ion), and 5% minor ingredients (iron oxide for color, clay or bentonite).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phos-Chek

[fish]

Well I'm shocked….

HILLARY 'SHOCKED'; KEEPS MONEY…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4966960/Hillary-condemns-Harvey-Weinstein-bit-keeps-cash.html

[Barry Pruett]

In addition to your commentary George, being that pilot safety is such a concern, why not take one step farther and to the retardant drops with drones?

[George Rebane]

BarryP 1206pm - Yes indeed, drone air attacks would not be that far off. All, and I do mean ALL, the technology exists for that now. It's a matter of money and politics. BTW, pilot air time is not a consideration in this discussion. We can hire and train more pilots (until the drones). Again it's a matter of money and politics.

PS. I'm too busy to take off the ad hominem exchanges with Mr Pelline. Later, because they don't belong here. His opinions about air attack policy are.

[Barry Pruett]

GeorgeR 100pm - We could also avoid a significant portion of the need to put out the fires in the first place by allowing removal of the fuel that makes them so large (maybe by drones as well)...but that is another discussion. Lol. Headed home fellas. Evacuation is no longer mandatory PER THE UNION. Love our community newspaper and its current employees.

[George Rebane]

BarryP 205pm - We are thankful that you have a home to return to; we have been in that situation, and the emotional lead-up with all the uncertainty was heartrending (see link in Update above).

BillT 1121am – La Tuna Canyon was the original and ‘ancient’ name for Tuna Canyon, which it was already renamed when we bought our land on Saddle Peak Road in 1976. You must have lived there a very long time ago Mr Tozer.

[JeffPelline]

George,
What does Pruett's 11:22 have to do with air attack policy? "As far as The Union’s number one critic." ...
This is like a clown college.

[George Rebane]

JeffP 237pm - It has a distant relationship to wildfires and their reporting. But in the end it's just another vagary in my editorial policy since you are the established critic extraordinaire of The Union, your former employer and our local paper that has done a great job keeping us up to date on the local fires (I understand that Pascal's YubaNet was a bit swamped by the many hits it got. She also has done an outstanding job as our perennial go-to fire reporter.) ;-)

[Don Bessee]

So that would make the dark lord the biggest clown @ 3p. ;-)

[Dave Cranfield]

I’ve been involved with aviation since I was 14 years old. Although retired, I stay active in the field.

Certainly, the technology exists to enable aircraft with flight guidance systems to fight fires during absolute darkness. However, obstacles always exist. I will speak to the aircraft at the Grass Valley Fire Base.

Cal Fire, at least in Northern California is contracted with DynCorp for most of the fire fighting aircraft. DynCorp supplies the aircraft, crews, maintenance and logistics. The pilots belong to a union called Cal Fire Pilots Association and may have a no night flying agreement that may be able to be renegotiated. DynCorp’s aircraft are old. Most were build in the 1950’s and 1960’s and considered Jurassic Junkers in the industry. Yes, the S2T’s and OV-10’s have had engine and other upgrades to extend their useful life but they all have analog cockpit instrumentation, not glass (digital) cockpits. Okay, there may be a GPS stuffed somewhere in the cockpit.

Upgrading these Junkers with a glass cockpit, terrain mapping, heat radar and the like would cost in the millions per aircraft. Not a prudent investment on aircraft in their eleventh hour.

The solution is the development of a low flying, slow, highly maneuverable aircraft with heavy lift capabilities. The Osprey comes to mind, but I am unsure of the retardant disbursement pattern given the massive propeller diameters.

One last item. Most wild land fires are extremely remote. Even with the latest and greatest flight guidance systems pilots must take over visually at times. In remote areas at night, there is no horizon as a visual reference and can lead to spatial disorientation.

[George Rebane]

DaveC 658am - Thanks for that thoughtful and informative comment. All the problems you outline appear to succumb to money and training given that the politics and policy issues are overcome.