This is why the United States only has 13 large air tankers

The Forest Service Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry misled Senators during a hearing today

John Phipps, Forest Service
John Phipps, Forest Service, Deputy Chief, State and Private Forestry

I was out of town when today’s hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources started this morning about the current wildland fire season. After I was able to access a computer to see the live broadcast at 02:05:00 into the testimony, the Forest Service’s strategy for keeping the air tanker fleet at a minuscule level was on display — again. (Link to the archived video of the hearing)  I have not watched the entire hearing, but here is what struck me about the exchange at 02:05:00.

How would the average person or average Senator interpret what John Phipps, Forest Service Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, said in response to a question from the Senator from Nevada?

Senator Catherine Masto: (partly unintelligible) …What do you anticipate as the need from the federal partners to increase air tanker support? I know how crucial that is.

John Phipps: We have up to 35 large air tankers. I think it’s important to understand that we have access to in the interagency environment for example the Department of the Interior has 100 Single Engine Aircraft, air tankers, under contract and depending on the situation and the need we have access to that and we are well under way for our planning and preparedness for the upcoming western fire season.

Senator Catherine Masto: Is there anything we can do at the federal level to assist you in that?

John Phipps: Not at this time.

Senator Catherine Masto: That’s good to hear. Thank you.

In other words, there is nothing to see here. Move along.

The average person or average Senator might think, “Holy crap, there are 135 air tankers ready to fight fires today? How could anyone ask for more? This is great!”

And that is why the number of large air tankers on exclusive use contracts has been stuck at 9 to 21 for the last 15 years. The Forest Service says they have three times the air tankers they actually have, they do not need more, Congress accepts their testimony without question, then moves on to another topic.

The truth is far different. And Mr. Phipps knew it. At best he was intentionally misleading the United States Senators. Some may call it lying. Saying “up to 35” could mean anywhere from zero to 35, and is meaningless. The Senators should have called him on this.

Today there are 13 large air tankers on exclusive use contracts. If protests that have been filed do not change anything, after the GAO makes their ruling due by July 15, 2020 there could be 5 more, to bring the total to 18.

A study completed for the Forest Service in 1996 (on page 61) recommended there be 41 large turbine-powered air tankers with a capacity of 3,000 to 5,000 gallons, essentially standards that are now the “next-generation” air tankers used today:

"Twenty P-3A, aircraft, ten C-130B aircraft, and 11 C-130E aircraft. This would provide for a [turbine-powered] fleet that is essentially 75% 3,000 gallon capacity and 25% 5,000 gallon capacity."

Single engine air tankers have their place in the firefighter’s tool box, but 700 to 800 gallons per load is far different from the 3,000 to 19,000 gallons carried by large and very large air tankers.

There are additional large air tankers on Call When Needed contracts signed in December with six companies for a total of 35 aircraft. The number “35” is misleading because most if not all of the 13 to 18 large air tankers on exclusive use (EU) contracts also have CWN contracts, meaning they would be removed from the CWN list. So there might only be 17 to 22 on CWN.  And that assumes all could pass the inspections required by this month. In December some of them did not exist as a complete air tanker.

CWN aircraft may or may not be immediately ready during the fire season, with mechanics and crew members available to suddenly drop what they were doing and start flying fires. In 2017 the average daily rate for large federal CWN air tankers was 54 percent higher than aircraft on exclusive use contracts. But CWN costs are charged to the virtually unlimited fire suppression accounts, so the Forest Service does not care about using taxpayer’s dollars in that manner. And they are not held accountable.

No-shows at the hearing were Forest Service Chief Vicki Christiansen and Director of Fire and Aviation Shawna Legarza.

I did not see in the hearing any mention of the delays in releasing the Aerial Firefighting Use and Effectiveness Study that has been going on for eight years, but maybe I missed it. (Update: the topic was not discussed.) Chief Christiansen has been testifying for the last two years before this committee saying it would be released “soon”. When pressed in February by Colorado Senator Cory Gardner, who last year made his opinion about the delay very clear, she said it would be released “this Spring”. Senator Gardner said, “Before June?” She said, “Yes”. I did not see the Senator in today’s hearing. (Update: Senator Gardner was not at the hearing.)

The announced topic of the hearing was “Wildfire management in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic.” Wildfire Today has coverage of that portion, in which Senators expressed strong opinions about testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) being available for all firefighters.

12 thoughts on “This is why the United States only has 13 large air tankers”

  1. No federal employee has any skin in the game, except their dedication and performance evaluations. No stockholders to answer to, no profit or loss accountability, etc. Keep the contractors on a lease and expect them to be there when you need them because they need you to survive and you know it. Get them to develop air frames and new technology advancements, on their dime.
    Keep the numbers down and hope for a short season. Then you can say “I saved X million dollars this year.” If it goes to hell, no harm no foul. Call CWN’s up at inflated prices because it isn’t coming out of my pocket.
    All you have to do is look at USPS, Amtrak, Medicare, SSA, FEMA, etc. Not good fiscal stewards by any stretch of the imagination. Rant over.

  2. It should be glaringly obvious to Congress, Dept. of AG, the White House, etc. that America is headed into an Australia type (late 2019) total wildfire crisis. This latest excellent story from Gabbert will soon roll up into the mainstream media.

    We will see countless stories like this one — https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/politics/federal/government-rejected-major-air-tanker-expansion-20200103-p53onl.html.

    Forest Service is going to take a beating for these lies. And then…Election Day comes. This is going to become a viral disaster for Forest Service and those government officials who fail to get out in front of this mess now.

  3. I live in wildfire country in northern California on the Oregon border. I have already been threatened by a 369,000 acre wildfire that blew right through our ranch and nearly got my two homes here. To read that some bureaucrat is lying to congress in an attempt to glorify his own position is absolutely insane. Those people in forestry who know the real truth need to step up and call this man’s bluff. Make him accountable for leaving our forest firefighters under equipped. PLEASE MAKE CONGRESS SEE THE LIGHT AND FUND THE EQUIPMENT THAT IS BADLY NEEDED, BEFORE ANOTHER DISASTROUS FIRE SEASON.

    1. Tony wasn’t well liked and he knew it. Brilliant guy, but not what NIFC needed at the time. Gotta give the guy credit for attitude, though — he showed up at one of the annual Reno airtanker conferences wearing a tshirt with a giant target on his back. 😄

  4. This guy [Phipps] should be removed from his post, for misleading /lying to Congress . He is a typical lifetime Bureaucrat ,only looking out for himself!! People like this need to Go!!

  5. For the Forest Service and their spoke people (is that the correct term?) just another day on the Hill, water off a ducks back. As large as the Forest Service is, less than four people in the “high tower” make all the decisions regardless of field input or citizens concerns. Or as the new motto goes, “too much too late”. Roll the news cameras.

    1. I’ll say it again, roll the cameras. The idea is to stop fires from becoming so large. Not always possible or if resource value is of little concern let-her-rip. There is a road, water, golf course (So. Cal.) natural barrier or lack of fuel, somewhere ahead, the fire is going to manage itself. I know there are a lot of dedicated folks in the MAFF program. To “frame-in using MAFF and private sector air tanker operators in the same sentence really doesn’t work. 24 hours, the horses have left the barn, now close the barn door. Too much too late.

  6. Other than a change in names things have not changed for the Forest Service since 2003. I testified for the Blue Ribbon Panel then and the same issues still exist. The Forest Service is inept at land management and are even worse at Aviation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *