Burning Questions

The two cracks each measured just over one-half inch, but they were enough to cause a Lockheed C-130A Hercules, a large air tanker, to lose its right wing on Aug. 13, 1994, during a firefighting mission in California's Tehachapi Mountains. Seven years later, two more firefighting tankers encountered similar trouble. On June 17, 2002, another Lockheed C-130A Hercules lost both wings, and on July 18, a Consolidated Vultee P4Y Privateer lost its left wing. Their cracks were longer-12 inches and 21 inches, respectively. All three crews died.

This year, an April report on the National Transportation Safety Board's investigation of the three crashes concluded that they resulted, at least in part, from inadequate maintenance and inspection. The report said procedures don't do enough to ensure that planes are safe. In response, the Forest Service and the Interior Department announced May 10-just as fire season was getting under way with major blazes in four states-that they would terminate contracts with providers of the 33 remaining large air tankers.

The announcement ignited controversy over whether the loss of the planes will hinder firefighting forces in what is expected to be a severe fire season. Republican governors Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Judy Martz of Montana wrote to Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman protesting the decision. "The past two years should have been spent identifying and directing resources to improve the fleet and secure new and reliable aircraft," Napolitano wrote in her May 11 letter. "Now, here we are faced with a potentially horrendous wildland fire season, and the decision is made to ground all large air tankers. Your delay in this matter is inexcusable."

In the past three years, the large tankers have delivered about 20 percent of the water, retardant and foam used to combat forest fires. The tankers are most effective for initial attacks because they can travel long distances faster and carry more liquid or foam in a single trip than the other 400-plus aircraft in the fleet. Smaller planes and helicopters-once moved to a nearby site-can refill and return to a blaze every six minutes, far faster than the large tankers can. To make up for the loss of the 33 tankers, the agencies will spend approximately $66 million to supplement the initial attack fleet with up to 46 single-engine air tankers, 71 helicopters and two CL 215 air tankers. Eight military C-130s also are available.

Following the 2002 accidents, the Forest Service and Interior appointed the special Blue-Ribbon Panel on Federal Aerial Firefighting and, following its report, had begun to step up safety procedures and develop plans for replacing aging planes. But the problem goes back more than just two years. The 33 tankers, which are mostly retired military planes, have an average age of 48 years. In many cases, their records are incomplete, which makes it impossible to document the planes' airworthiness. They are owned and operated by eight private companies. Under the original plan for the fleet, the contractors followed the manufacturers' maintenance and inspection programs specific to each plane's design.

"The problem is that no one was overseeing those programs," says Tony Kern, who manages the Forest Service's aerial fleet. NTSB concluded that because the planes are old and operating outside their original design intent, the programs were inadequate. Kern says Forest Service officials believed the Federal Aviation Administration was responsible for overseeing the contractors' maintenance and inspection. But because FAA does not have jurisdiction over aircraft used by government agencies, the NTSB report placed that responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the Forest Service and Interior. The agencies say they don't have the necessary expertise to determine how the stresses of firefighting affect the planes, or how to account for a plane's age in adjusting maintenance and inspection programs. "We're a land management agency, not an aviation agency," Kern says.

Terry Unsworth, president and CEO of Aero Union, which provided 13 of the large tankers, says his company follows the same procedures the Navy does for its P3s. "NTSB painted [with] a very broad brush, and everyone was guilty by association," he says. "We have very good aircraft with complete records." Aero Union laid off 50 workers immediately after the termination of the contracts and will have to lay off 100 more if the decision stands, Unsworth says.

A new arrangement with the FAA gives the planes' owners hope. At the request of lawmakers, FAA officials agreed to assist in developing an emergency program to inspect the tankers and Forest Service officials have said that they will renew contracts for planes that they can ensure are safe. FAA engineers will review the tankers' flight histories and maintenance and inspection records. If the engineers deem planes safe, the agencies will present the findings to the NTSB to make sure they meet expectations.

The arrangement sparked optimism about getting at least some of the planes back in the air this summer, though the tankers' fate remains uncertain. Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey warned there's no guarantee the planes will prove airworthy, and the timetable for the inspections is uncertain. Rey said the process would take a minimum of 30 days.

Kern plans to work with FAA to develop a special-use manual for planes that will be subjected to the strains of firefighting, and to get at least some of them back into the air as soon as possible. Some planes are newer and should be easier to assess. "I'm hopeful that we'll take the low-hanging fruit and then work our way up the tree," Kern says.

Flying Relics