Coulson’s three C-130’s reporting for duty

Coulson air tankers

Coulson Aviation distributed this photo today of their three C-130-type air tankers lined up at Reno for “USFS carding”. As we reported on April 10, they introduced their third tanker this month, another L-382G. They also have a C-130Q. The tanker numbers when used in the USA are 131, 132, and 133.

At the end of this month the company will be conducting their annual pilot training.

And, on another subject, can you find the two air tankers in the photo below that was taken by the RAAF at the Avalon Air Show in Australia around March 4?

Avalon Air Show
Avalon Air Show. RAAF photo.

3 thoughts on “Coulson’s three C-130’s reporting for duty”

  1. Bill ; RE— :Coulson
    What am I missing here? Coulson Aviation appears to have 3 C 130H type aerial tankers [Apr. 2017]
    Part of the question is ; are we using all 3 in the US ;and if not why not ?
    What happened to the 6 /7 C130s transferred from the USCG to the USFS . Supposed to be operational by now ,and if they are not ;then why no Congressional investigation by Western Congressional leaders ? Why doesn’t the USFS APRROVE THE PURCHASE OF MORE COULSON TYPE 737s.
    Finally ,I know that funding is hard to come by ,however the West with it’s drought conditions seems to be a National emergency . I am getting the idea that the USFS HAS NO INTENTION OF EFFECTIVELY EXTINGUISHING WILDFIRES ,HAS NO MANPOWER TO DO SO ,AND HAS SO OVER-REGULATED THE USE OF EQUIPMENT THAT THIS ALSO IS USELESS.
    THE INSPECTOR GENERAL’S OFFICE DOI –OIG ,HAS PRACTICALLY SOLICTED ME TO FILE A COMPLAINT ,WHICH I AM CONSIDERING . [ not trying to be a wise guy ,as I realize that you have more insight and knowledge than I do] .Thank you

    1. Charles-

      You’ll need to ask the USFS for their reasoning about which air tankers they have on contract.

      One of the seven HC-130H aircraft obtained from the Coast Guard is semi-operational as an air tanker, with a temporary slip-in MAFFS retardant system. It will be years before all seven have the maintenance and conversion work completed.

      Your comments about the USFS are extremely harsh and not based on facts. Their wildfire personnel are very good at what they do. However, some may disagree with higher management’s decisions about how aggressively they attack new fires, or which fires are managed under a less than full suppression strategy, vs which ones are fully suppressed. The amount of funding supplied by our congress critters also can affect the long term results and effectiveness of our federal agencies. Contact your reps and let them know your opinions.

Comments are closed.