FIGHTING FIRES BY AIRCRAFT

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28260, 24 April 1957, Page 9

FIGHTING FIRES BY AIRCRAFT

South Island Tests

Proposed

[Specially written for “The Press”}

GREAT things are hoped for from a new weapon in the war against the menace of fire sweeping through the South Island’s high-country tussock grasslands. This. new weapon, the ‘ aerial fire brigade,” was the subject of spectacular field trials at Rotorua recently, the latest in a series conducted under the auspices of the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Council.

The trial proved to the satisfaction of most observers that aerial fire-fighting is an entirely practical idea, but it is hoped to hold another test under natural conditions on South Island tussock. More than 12 million acres of tussock, much of it vital to soil conservation and under buring-off restrictions, are creating a growing fire hazard which must be met by new developments in control methods. “Sowing” of water by topdressing aircraft may hold the answer. This viewpoint survived a meet-

ing of the council’s advisory committee on agricultural aviation, which immediately after the Rotorua trials agreed to continue the experiments by moving on to bigger and more realistic simulations of running fires in forest and tussock grassland, and by applying lessons learned at Rotorua. Committee members included fire-fighting specialists of the State Forest Service, and representatives of the aviation industry, Federated Farmers, the Civil Aviation Administration, the Lands and Survey Department

and of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. During the afternoon the committee saw three Beaver aircraft, operating from Rotorua airfield, attempting a really tough assignment —two fires in which highly combustible scrub and hay had been literally drenched with fuel oil. In one case, hundreds of old motor tyres and stacks of logs and tree stumps added to a blaze which v would not have yielded easily to any method of fire-fighting with water. Frequent Sorties Touched off by a flame-thrower, the first fire—on half an acre of treated scrub—became an inferno within three minutes. During the attack —one sortie every 90 seconds—the aircraft used 1600 gallons of water, each drop of 200 gallons acting like a curtain of heavy, driving rain on a strip about, two chains long and from 15 to 20 feet wide. Each plane dumped its load within two seconds; loading time was 45 seconds and time on the ground between sorties was 55 seconds. Water was fed into their hoppers, normally used for carrying fertiliser, by two leads of hose manned by Rotorua firemen. Within 10 minutes, the first fire was under control, but not completely extinguished, and the attack was shifted to the second fire. Here there was an exceptionally fierce “spot” blaze, and the Beavers maintained their efforts for approximately half an hour without a break on the same schedule of one sortie every 90 seconds. ° The blaze' was extinguished at each run, but only momentarily, and when the experiment was called off the fire was still well alight. As one observer expressed it, however, “The pilots gave an excellent performance for men who were developing entirely new techniques. . . . And they proved aircraft can keep up a sustained delivery of a considerable volume of water over a long period.” Mr D. D. Dun, Conservator of Forests at Rotorua, said he was well pleased. It was obvious, he said, that more experience would bring better results, and that the key to efficiency in dealing with real outbreaks would be the availability of airstrips with water, and how many and how quickly aircraft could be put into action.

The Problems Later, when the committee critically analysed the experiments, Mr W. F. Wright, Chief Fire Control Officer for the Forest Service, made it clear that a very high standard •of efficiency would be needed before aerial methods could be; usefully applied in forest work. Many other problems were frankly discussed by the committee, and set down for further work. They included: (I) Safpty precautions: Safe flying techniques must be studied, and attention given to the need for basic training so that pilots likely to be called on in an emergency will know just what they are facing and what to do. (II) Optimum methods: Varying methods are required for varying types of fire under varying conditions, and the best way of making use of water delivered by aircraft has yet to be devised. (III) Organisation: Airstrips designed for quick loading and turnround, and with a water supply, would be essential. Methods of fast loading with water will have to be found. (IV) Communications: Radio communication . between a ground fire control officer and the pilots appears vital, and there would need to be a system for calling in aircraft scattered widely in the course of their normal duties. (V) Legal aspects: The question of responsibility; economic considerations; financing of fire-fighting operations. All these things, and many more must, be investigated, but through it all the air-borne fire brigade remains an entirely practical conception, and one with a high potential as a weapon in the constant battle against the forest and grassland fire menace.