The Country Fire Service is refusing to properly consider world-class fire-fighting techniques which could save lives, say the men who ran the authority during the devastating Ash Wednesday bushfires of 1983.
Lloyd Johns, the CFS’s director from 1979 to 1985, and Peter Schwerdtfeger, CFS board chairman from 1977 to 1984, both suffered public accusations and personal regret after the Ash Wednesday bushfires.
Mr Johns was fired from the service and later successfully took court action for unfair dismissal.
Since leaving, they have researched what could and should have been done to curtail tragedy.
Both conclude the CFS is missing one crucial element – a large-scale aircraft such as the Bombardier 415, commonly referred to as the SuperScooper.
“These planes are specifically designed to fly in fire conditions. The crop-dusters currently used, while good fire-fighting measures, aren’t purpose-built and have restrictions because of that,” said Mr Johns.
The SuperScooper aircraft can work on both land and water. It is a large plane which carries 6000 litres of water and flies at speeds comparable to a commercial plane for up to four hours without refuelling.
One difference between these planes and the fixed-wing bombers on the SA fleet, which carry more water, is the larger fuel capacity and ability to top-up water supplies by scooping from nearby reservoirs and coastlines.
Mr Johns and Mr Schwerdtfeger say the CFS has an inexplicable resistance to using this kind of technology.
“The appalling thing is the entrenched lobby which has become persuasive and powerful that has worked so hard against these planes,” Mr Schwerdtfeger said.
Manager of aviation services at the CFS, David Cant, said the SuperScooper planes had been left out of the fleet because they were not the best choice for local conditions.
“They are a good and capable aircraft but there are limitations in SA,” he said.
SA’s aerial fire-fighting fleet consists of an Erickson air crane, which is a helicopter-like vehicle, and 13 other aircraft including three Bell helicopters, seven fixed-wing air tractors and three fixed-wing surveillance planes.
Mr Cant said this mix suited SA.
“The number of aircraft we have in SA means we have the fastest response bombers in the world. We also supplement them with high-capacity helicopters like the Erickson air-crane,” he said.
But Mr Schwedtfeger said the SuperScooper was capable of fighting fires in worse conditions and being more effective than the vehicles currently in the fleet.
“They are able to withstand turbulent forces because of their stubby purpose-build, and they fly low and accurate. You can’t take aircraft built for steady and level flight and fly them into a severely turbulent environment and expect them to perform properly,” he said.
Mr Cant said the SuperScooper was restricted by SA conditions. He argues there is not enough scooping water available for the plane, no logical place to base the aircraft and that it is not worth the high cost.
“There’s only about three reservoirs they can work from and once you get above one metre wave height in the sea they are limited with scooping there. They do need a longer airstrip to take off initially; that’s one of the limitations, too,” he said.
“They’re a very expensive aircraft. What we try and do is get value for money and cover the maximum community areas in SA.”
Mr Johns and Mr Schwerdtfeger protest the first two objections as untrue.
“Ninety per cent of the SA population lives within 50km of the coast. I’ve stood on the beach in Glenelg and watched a demonstration aircraft scoop in 1.8 metres waves,” Mr Johns said.
Mr Schwerdtfeger added: “This is an extremely powerful aeroplane and the take-off distances it requires are extremely modest.”
A submission from the company which manufactures the aircraft, Bombardier, to the Victorian Bushfire Inquiry of 2003 supports their claims.
They also argue the expensive upfront cost of the plane would be recouped through savings on bushfire damage and because it could be employed in a variety of roles including search and rescue and coastline monitoring.
Mr Johns said the CFS would not properly consider the plane, despite its life-saving potential, because of a culture of misinformation around the discipline.
“It’s an old-boy culture within the fire authorities. They’re not prepared to open their minds and look at the objective capabilities of these planes,” he said.
Mr Johns and Mr Schwerdtfeger are frustrated. When they think about the SuperScooper they can’t help imagine how it could have been used under their authority during the Ash Wednesday crisis to save lives and property.
“Take it from me, because I was there and in charge, those aircraft could have been flying for 90 per cent of the time,” said Mr Johns.
Mr Cant said there was no need to add the SuperScooper to “the good mix” we already have in SA.
More money has been allocated to aerial fire-fighting in recent years. In the 2002/2003 budget, only $1.6 million was given, while in the most recent budget almost $6.8 million was paid.
Emergency Services Minster Michael Wright said the money helped build a “diverse fleet of firefighting aircraft here in South Australia for the widely dispersed fire risk areas”.
Those outside the ranks of CFS and government question whether it is diverse enough.
Email a friend
Favourites
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Reddit
Newsvine
LinkedIn
Kwoff
Twitter