Exclusive: The drop safety challenge with Perimeter Solutions

by Breaking NewsIFSJ Exclusives

Perimeter Solutions Director of Research and Development Melissa Kim and Agency Liaison Ron Raley look at safe fire retardant drops

When asked to comment on the proliferation of wildfires in recent years, a recurrent theme among leaders in fire management over the past 12 months has been that we no longer have a wildfire season, but a wildfire year. In 2021 alone, more than 8,500 wildfires took place across North America with fires burning through the end of December into January 2022. And conditions aren’t expected to get any better.

 Earlier this year, a new report from the United Nations forecast that the total number of wildfires around the world will increase 50% by the end of the century. With that expected growth in activity and considering that developers are continuing to build homes and businesses within the wildland-urban interface (WUI), there will be increased dependency on aerial attack to suppress and stop the spread of wildfires in order to save lives and protect property. Whenever pilots take to the skies to battle wildfire, they are not only putting their lives at risk to protect others, but also firefighters on the ground working to extinguish the fire.

Pilots have to deal with the heat from the fire, turbulence, reduced visibility from smoke, and a host of other dangers inherent with fire. The act of dropping fire retardant is one of the most significant threats faced by both pilots and fire suppression crews on the ground. This article will outline years of innovation in fire retardant formulation that have helped to improve drop safety for pilots and firefighters.

Challenges with drop safety

The predominant safety issue when applying retardant on active fires is “low drops” – when retardant is released by aircraft from an altitude that is not sufficiently high to ensure safety. Low visibility from smoke can block obscure trees or mountainsides from view, creating safety issues for pilots. For those on the ground, the retardant itself presents a major safety issue.

In order to understand the safety issues associated with low drops it is important to first understand the dynamics of a safe and effective drop.  As the aircraft doors open and the retardant is released from the tanks it forms into a mass of fluid.  The retardant is moving at the same forward airspeed as the aircraft, which can be anywhere between 120 to 150 knots, depending on the airtanker type. This forward-moving mass of fluid is immediately subjected to winds equivalent to the forward airspeed.  It begins to erode by wind shear and break apart into smaller droplets. As these smaller droplets are formed, their forward airspeed begins to decline to a point where they reach terminal forward velocity and begin entering the fuel vertically.

When the aircraft is at an altitude in which this dynamic occurs, it is considered a safe and effective drop height. These safe and effective altitudes are contingent upon the type of tank door system, forward airspeed, and volume of retardant. The United States Forest Service (USFS) has issued guidance requiring drop heights to be no lower than 150’ above ground level (AGL). In actuality, it is the altitude above the top of the target fuels or vegetation that is important. Higher safe drop heights have been established for Very Large Airtankers (VLATs). 

A mixed solution of retardant weighs roughly nine pounds per gallon. If a 3,000-gallon airtanker drops 2,000 gallons of retardant on a fire, that means 18,000 pounds of retardant are coming out of the plane all at once. Drops released at less than the safe and effective drop heights do not have sufficient time to erode and reach terminal velocity. These drops will impact terrain, vegetation—and many times—firefighters with this tremendous weight and at full force. (See figure 1 below.) When this happens, the results can be devastating, as was the case during the Mendocino Complex Fire that burned in Northern California during the summer of 2018.

The Mendocino fire burned nearly 460,000 acres before it was completely contained. During the firefight, an airtanker was cleared by the Air Tactical Group Supervisor to drop and inadvertently released the retardant load below the established safe drop height. An 87-foot tree was toppled and, unfortunately, killed a firefighter and injured three others.

The minimum safe drop height for a VLAT like a 747 or DC 10, is at 250 feet AGL. As mentioned earlier, the USFS has established a minimum safe drop height of 150 feet for large air tankers (LATs), while there is a minimum safe drop height of 90 feet AGL for single-engine air tankers (SEATs) according to the Bureau of Land Management.

While minimum drop heights are established for different aircraft, calculating the optimal drop height for each aircraft is challenging, primarily because each type of aircraft has a different gating system, different volumes of product it can safely transport, drop speeds and more. The sweet spot for each aircraft must be established, which is why drop testing and immediate pilot feedback is critical.

Improving Safety with Fire Retardant

Even after determining the sweet spot for any given aircraft, reduced visibility and unfamiliarity with surrounding geography will continue to present challenges to aerial firefighters. The use of highly advanced fire-retardant formulations today plays a role in improving drop performance and safety.

Recovery is an important parameter when dealing with long-term fire retardant. Recovery is a measure of the amount of solution that actually reaches the target compared to the quantity dropped.  It is represented as a percentage.  Gum thickeners are critical to drop performance, allowing for drop effectiveness at much higher altitudes while increasing recovery. 

Typically, gum-thickened retardants will have recovery rates over 85 percent while those without gum thickeners may have as little as 50 percent. The gum thickeners increase viscosity, droplet size, provide cohesion and elasticity, which combine to result in less evaporation and drift, and therefore higher recovery rates. Elevating drop heights provides for a much higher level of safety for both firefighters and pilots.

How effective the retardant drop is—regardless of altitude—is heavily dependent on properly mixing the solution. Whether you’re 150 feet in the air or 850 feet in the air, retardant mixed improperly can clump together, creating a mass of retardant that weighs thousands of pounds and is falling through the air at up to 140 miles an hour.  Thoroughly mixed solutions of fire retardant improve safety for aerial firefighters. Current day advanced retardant mixing systems have nearly eliminated these issues providing for a higher degree of safety.

Visibility of retardant is another advancement that has improved performance. When fire retardant solutions are applied, successive drops are often made by the aircraft to form a fire line. When creating the line, it is essential for the aircraft’s pilot to visually determine where the preceding loads were dropped and ensure that the next load sufficiently overlaps the previous drop. This will provide a continuous line with no breaks, which helps prevent the active wildfire from burning through any gaps in that line.

Since fire retardant components may be colorless or include colors that do not contrast well with the ground or vegetation, coloring agents are added to give fire retardant solutions their distinct red color. This color provides significant contrast with the hue of the ground vegetation, enhancing the ability of the pilot to determine where the last loads of fire retardants were dropped.

One of the less obvious ways retardants helps improve drop safety is through improved solutions that inhibit corrosion and damage to aircraft parts.  When the US Forest Service created the first modern specification for long-term fire retardants in 1986, it covered a broad range of issues relating to efficacy and use of fire-retardant chemicals, including “uniform and intergranular corrosion”. These new formulations of retardant have essentially eliminated corrosion on aircraft as a critical safety issue.

While wildfire season continues to grow in length and intensity the demands on aerial firefighting will continue to increase. Responsible fire-retardant manufacturers like Perimeter Solutions are working with leaders in the fire management industry to continually introduce innovations that improve environmental footprint, help pilots do their job more effectively, and make it safer for them to protect themselves and firefighters.

This article was originally published in the March edition of IFSJ. To read your FREE digital copy, click here.

Coulson Aviation provides Argentina with aerial firefighting support

by Featured NewsVehicles

Coulson Aviation has announced that it is providing aerial firefighting support services to Argentina via a CDN $6.8 million dollar government to government contract between the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) and Argentina’s Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MAyDS).

Beginning in January 2023, one of Coulson’s CH-47 helitankers is on a contract for a four-month period to meet Argentina’s aerial fire needs, ensuring quick response to large-scale wildfires. 

Britton Coulson, President and COO, Coulson Aviation said: “The 10,000 liter capacity CH-47 is not only the largest payload commercially available helicopter, it’s also one of the fastest. We have been operating this fleet type worldwide with excellent serviceability and look forward to demonstrating its capabilities to the Argentine Government.” 

The contract comes as a result of a Memorandum of Understanding between CCC and MAyDS to bring Canadian firefighting expertise and technology to Argentina and is financed by Argentina’s National Fire Management Program (Servicio Nacional del Manejo del Fuego – PNMF), which supports the monitoring, prevention and management of the country’s fire emergencies. 

Reid Sirrs, Canadian Ambassador to Argentina, said: “As a country with almost 362 million hectares of forests, Canada understands the importance of protecting this valuable natural resource and stands ready to share firefighting expertise and technology with Argentina.”

In September 2019, Coulson, in partnership with CCC, signed an agreement with the Bolivian government to supply its leading aerial firefighting support services by providing 18 crew members along with three helicopters, including two Sikorsky S-61 helicopters and a custom Chinook CH-47D. Coulson became the first Canadian company to send aircraft and their crews to combat fires in the Bolivian Amazon rainforest. 

Wilson Pearce, Senior Director, Global Business Development Operations, Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) added “For over 75 years, our government to government contracting approach has connected qualified Canadian companies to government buyers around the world. We’re pleased to further this tradition by connecting Coulson Aviation and the government of Argentina through a G2G contract.”

New report outlines plan to meet aerial firefighting equipment needs in US

by Featured News

The Biden-Harris administration’s Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission has released a report outlining a strategy to meet aerial firefighting equipment needs through 2030.

The report released today re-examines existing approaches to aviation fleet procurement, mobilisation, composition and quantity in order to set aviation management on a new trajectory for the next decade and beyond.

The Commission, created by President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and announced in December 2021, was charged with making recommendations to improve federal policies related to the mitigation, suppression, and management of wildland fires in the United States, and the rehabilitation of land in the United States devastated by wildland fires.

Chaired by the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator, the Commission was tasked with developing two reports to Congress: the latest report is on aerial firefighting, and another report scheduled for release in Fall 2023 that delivers a comprehensive set of recommendations to address the nation’s wildfire crisis.

Findings and recommendations outlined in the report include: The need for the development of new or updated aviation resource benchmarks and national procurement models and the need for greater coordination with partners in these efforts, improvements to appropriations, contracting, staffing and interoperability to improve the use and availability of existing resources, improvements and limitations to the military surplus process and equipment, and additional considerations, including aviation resource use in beneficial fire and the emerging importance of Uncrewed Aerial Systems.

The Commission, composed of representatives from federal agencies, state, local and Tribal governments, and representatives from the private sector meets monthly to discuss and craft these recommendations.

Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland commented: “Climate change has increased the duration and intensity of wildfire seasons and, with it, added pressures on wildland firefighters who are on the frontlines. The Biden-Harris administration is committed to providing the necessary equipment and resources to support their work and keep them safe.

“Through President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Administration is providing coordinated investments in wildland fire management and support for our firefighting workforce. I am grateful to the Wildland Fire Management and Mitigation Commission for their hard work as they guide us into the future.”

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said: “Wildfires are growing larger and more complex and business as usual is not an option in protecting communities and landscapes. Thanks to the landmark support from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission has brought together diverse voices to address problems and find solutions to these challenges. This report represents the next step in the Commission’s critical work, and explores how aviation resources can be best brought to bear on the nation’s wildfire crisis.”

 FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell added: “Climate change and associated extreme weather events are being felt by communities across the country. We are seeing a surge in devastating floods, more energized hurricanes, and a wildfire season that’s now a year-long threat. Wildfires in particular are becoming a near-constant risk, destroying lives and property nationwide.

“To respond to these increasing threats, we must use every tool at our disposal while re-examining existing approaches to better protect people. This report is an example of the type of work required to mitigate climate risks and we will continue to work with our partners across the Biden-Harris Administration to improve federal policies related to America’s persistent fire problem.”

Airport firefighting: Too hot to handle?

by AviationFeatured News

Mike Willson, firefighting foam and foam systems specialist, investigates whether airport firefighting foams fit is for purpose under increasingly hot summers

The world is experiencing more frequent and severe summer heat waves, impacting our safety.  Soaring 40-47oC temperatures across much of Europe, North America, India and Pakistan across to China, Korea, Australia and Japan were experienced during summers 2021 and 2022. Usually restricted to Saharan Africa, Middle East, Mexico, even Central Asia, July 2022 saw Arctic Norway glow in 30.8oC, while London’s Heathrow sizzled in record breaking 40.2oC. Heat stress and increased fire volatility are both outcomes facing firefighters.

We rely heavily on firefighting foam fire test approvals like ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) and European Norm EN1568-3 to verify acceptable fire performance under all major credible event conditions being faced during fire emergencies, including hot summers. Such fire testing is routinely conducted in cool 15±5oC conditions. US MilSpecrequires 23±5oC but most choose the lower temperatures, gaining a cooling advantage – never elevated around realistic ≥40oC.levels. Do all foams still work under such elevated conditions? How do we know? It is becoming a significant life safety issue.

Ignitable vapours hover above pooled fuel when Jet A1’s 38oC flashpoint is exceeded. These vapours are easily lit by burning embers or incandescent materials, potentially causing rapid re-escalation. Rising temperatures increase extinguishment difficulty, with fuel vapours more easily penetrating foam blankets, reducing effectiveness and causing premature collapse, particularly when fuel repelling or vapour sealing additives are absent. Where does this leave passenger safety?

Foam quality

Foundation research by US FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) established that Fluorine-free or PFAS-free foams (F3s) (i.e. without aqueous film formation) showed: “The predominant factor defining firefighting effectiveness is foam quality, which is indicated to rapidly deteriorate through the loss of liquid as it drains from the foam body at elevated solution temperatures.” It concluded: “As the foam viscosity increases, the fluidity decreases, and the foam may become more difficult and time-consuming to distribute uniformly over a burning fuel surface. Therefore, excessively high or low water temperatures are to be avoided.”

Investigations by US Naval Research laboratory in 2015 confirmed that: “Fuel surface cooling by the foam and the resulting reduction in fuel vapor pressure, which depends exponentially on the surface temperature. … the interface cools because the two layers are at different temperatures”. Consequently, higher foam solution temperatures have an exponentially reduced ‘cooling’ effect, making fires harder and slower to control and extinguish. Maximising rapid cooling could be delivering ‘easier approval passes’ – but how does this affect hot summer performances?

NRL extended their work in 2017 finding: “As the fuel temperature is raised, there is a higher concentration of fuel vapours beneath the foam than at lower temperatures. This increased concentration at the foam interface can increase the amount of fuel transport through the foam, increasing the rate of foam degradation … For all experiments F3 degraded much faster than AFFF. …The effect of surfactant formulation is a close second relative to the temperature effect.”

2012 FAA research cautioned against the impact of aircraft composite materials like carbon fibre: “There is also potential for re-ignition of a fuel fire from smouldering fuselage composites.” It referenced US Military graphite/epoxy/carbon fibre composite testing, finding that: “This composite would self-sustain combustion in as little as 2.5 minutes of exposure to an external pool-type fire. … The pool fire was easily extinguished in all tests. However, extinguishment of the composite combustion was not as easy. The surface flames were readily extinguished, but smouldering composite combustion was already established. To extinguish … fire fighters applied a continuous stream of AFFF directly on the composite material. After applying AFFF for 3 minutes or more, the smouldering composite combustion was extinguished.” Do such re-ignition sources further expose F3 vulnerabilities, without vapour sealing additives?

Protocol deficiencies

These findings highlight potential deficiencies in our existing fire test protocols. FAA’s Oct. 2021 Cert Alert raised public safety concerns with Fluorine Free Foams (F3s) due to delayed extinguishment times; failure to maintain fire suppression; incompatibilities with dry chemical and other foam agents, plus firefighter training strategies. FAA’s rigorous testing of nineteen F3s (nine commercially available, ten developmental) at room temperature (around 20oC) concluded: “Approximately 400 fire tests have been conducted; none passed MilSpec or ICAO Level C”.

Consequently, FAA: “Conducted ICAO Level C tests both outside and inside because of test results.” All F3s tested failed ICAO Level C and MilSpec fire tests indoors (~20oC) in FAA’s latest USD $5 million ‘state-of-the-art’ fire test facility. They also all failed ICAO Level C protocol when re-tested outdoors under similar conditions. Surprisingly analysis showed these leading F3s had Fluorine levels from 10-87ppm, which could exceed some residual PFAS expectations. 

62% of F3s also failed to extinguish within Level C’s 2-minute requirement, with two failing to extinguish completely. Burn back testing was also failed by 66% F3s tested. All F3s similarly failed MilSpec’s 30sec extinguishment outdoors, only one achieving 38secs, the rest up to 2mins 23secs (also ~20oC). FAA concluded: “Overall, none of the tested FFF candidates can be considered a direct replacement for AFFF without compromising the efficacy of fire extinguishment.”

FAA and NRL are undergoing extensive scientific research and rigorous fire testing to find adequately effective F3 alternatives to meet these demands, but so far unsuccessfully. So, what happens during hot summers, when conditions make fires even harder to extinguish?

ICAO requires Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Services (ARFFS) to operationally use 5.5L/min/square metrewhen firefighting with AFFFs, delivering adequate safety under wide ranging operational conditions during credible major fire events, based on a safety factor double the Level B fire application rate of 2.5L/min/square metre(1.56L/min/sq metre for tougher Level C).Is this safety factor adequate for F3s without fuel-repelling or vapour-sealing additives? Reluctance to conduct realistic high temperature F3 competency testing to ICAO Level B, means we still don’t know, potentially placing travellers’ lives under increased risks.

Unnecessary risks

This safety factor covers a range of practical ‘contingencies’ across often unforeseen, diverse prevailing conditions associated with major credible aircraft fires, including: Foam destruction factors like wind, rain, snow, ice, high/low temperatures, updrafts/vortexing; Fuel re-exposure by wind increasing re-ignition risk and sudden flashbacks; Some foam blankets (particularly PFAS-free) are attacked by co-incident dry chemical powder usage; Premature reduction in foam blanket fluidity/effectiveness from low humidity; longer pre-burn times increasing fire intensity; and lower foam blanket quality and greater plunging effects (from non-aspirating/lower expansion nozzles), potentially exacerbated by pressure fluctuations.

Additionally: Temperatures exceeding fuel flashpoints increase vapourisation rates, fire intensity, particularly when pooled on hot concrete runways or tarmac; Under or over-rich proportioning with resultant under-performance (‘too watery’ or ‘over-stiff’ if rich), potentially reducing foam quality or duration; Poor mixing of viscous concentrates, forming inadequately dissolved ‘globules’; Reduced effectiveness from delayed foam activation/response and composite materials; Stability changing with water quality (hard/soft/bore/seawater); and insufficient/inadequate training on foam type; operator errors; exposing foam vulnerabilities (not strengths), eroding effectiveness when insufficiently conservative tactics used.

Shouldn’t these safety considerations be incorporated into ICAO Level B/C fire tests? US MilSpec (2020) includes most considerations, which now risk exclusion in the draft land forces alternative F3 MilSpec, seemingly with ‘watered down’ performance levels potentially exposing not safeguarding lives – it’s key objective. Worrying evidence from a 2016 Dubai Boeing 777 crash in 48oC conditions, saw the aircraft ‘burned out’ after 16 hours, despite several failed attempts to extinguish using F3s.

So our Regulators, EPA’s, Standard approvals, FAA, Defense ARFFS and the travelling public are left with a major dilemma: Either we ‘force through’ weaker F3 specifications, without providing equivalent current fire protections to save lives in future major fire incidents, or we continue using proven, effective, life protections even when severe conditions prevail (eg. Syria, Afghanistan) or like civilian heat waves of 2021-22, by continue using high purity, short-chain C6AFFFs.

Evidence suggests it’s time for a re-think before exposing many lives to unacceptably increased risk of harm – or do we choose to continue risking the loss of plane-loads of precious lives unnecessarily? The real question that needs to be asked: it that even ethical?

About the author

Mike Willson BSc Hons, MCIM, is a firefighting foam and foam systems specialist with over 35 years’ experience of developing, testing, comparing and reviewing fire performance and environmental impacts of both fluorinated and fluorine free foams, their delivery devices and integrated fixed systems performances. An active member of Fire Protection Association Australia’s Special Hazards Technical Advisory Committee, he provides technical advice to a diverse range of stakeholders to better protect Class B flammable liquids with potentially suitable C6 and PFAS-free (F3) alternatives.

This article was originally published in the January edition of IFSJ. To read your FREE digital copy, click here.

Bridger Aerospace appoints new Chief Financial Officer

by Featured NewsPeople

Bridger Aerospace Group Holdings, a leading independent provider of aerial firefighting services, has appointed Eric Gerratt as Chief Financial Officer.

The announcement comes ahead of Bridger’s planned merger with Jack Creek Investment Corp – a special purpose acquisition company – and subsequent listing on NASDAQ.

Tim Sheehy, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, commented: “Bringing on a CFO with public company experience was important as Bridger makes this transition.

“Eric brings extensive financial reporting and management experience to our company, as well as acquisition and integration expertise, having helped grow his former company to nearly $1.0 billion in revenue.

“We look forward to him being a valued addition to the Bridger team as we expand throughout North America and globally to meet the rising demand for critical aerial firefighting services.”

Eric Gerratt joins Bridger from US Ecology, a leader in environmental services, where he was Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer. He spent 15 years with US Ecology until its recent acquisition by Republic Services, during which time US Ecology’s revenue grew from $166 million to nearly $1.0 billion.

Prior to joining US Ecology, Gerratt served as Vice President of Accounting for SuperValu, Inc., held various director level accounting and finance positions at Albertsons, Inc. and spent six years with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Gerratt is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a B.S. in Accounting from the University of Idaho.

Commenting on his new position, he said: “I am excited to join Bridger, a company that has a strong track record of financial performance and significant opportunities for growth as it prepares to go public. As climate conditions evolve and wildfires grow in number and severity, the Company’s fully integrated aerial firefighting solution is critical to save property and minimize economic and environmental damage.

“With Bridger’s unique positioning, the potential for value creation is tremendous, and I look forward to working with its experienced management team to expand these critical services.”

EU proposes €170 million budget for transitional firefighting fleet

by Featured NewsIndustry SectorsWildland Fire

Following a record-breaking forest fire season in Europe, the European Commission has proposed €170 million from the EU budget to reinforce its rescEU ground and aerial assets, starting from the summer of 2023.

With this budget, the rescEU transitional fleet would have 22 planes, 4 helicopters and more prepositioned ground teams.

It also proposed that as of 2025 the fleet would be further reinforced through an accelerated procurement of airplanes and helicopters.

Commissioner for Crisis Management, Janez Lenarčič, said: “Due to climate change the number of regions affected by wildfires is increasing, going beyond the traditionally affected Mediterranean countries. The last summers have clearly shown that more firefighting assets are needed at EU-level.

“By building up our fleet of aerial means and ground forces, the EU will be able to ensure a prompt, flexible response, including in situations where fires are burning in multiple Member States at the same time.”

Commissioner for Budget and Administration, Johannes Hahn, said: “While the record-breaking forest fires this summer may have been overshadowed by other crises, today’s proposal to reinforce rescEU shows that the EU budget will continue to support those in need.

“European solidarity across EU Member States remains strong and we are ready to support this solidarity with financial means.”

Arista Aviation wins Portuguese Air Force aerial firefighting contract

by Breaking NewsProductsVehicles

Arista Aviation Services, a provider of rotary wing aircraft repair, overhaul, and modernisation with specialisation in the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter, has announced that is has been been awarded a contract to provide six firefighting-capable Black Hawks to the Portuguese Air Force (Força Aérea Portuguesa), besting Industry OEMs Leonardo and Bell Helicopter.

The contract includes the delivery of six aircraft over the next three years, training for six pilots and 21 mechanics, and five years of onsite maintenance and logistical support. With the addition of these helicopters, Portuguese Air Force aerial firefighting capabilities will be enhanced as each Arista-modified Black Hawk will have the ability to quickly transport 12 firefighters and over 750 gallons of water to rural areas when needed.

Arista President Rich Enderle said, “The Black Hawk has proven itself around the world as an extremely versatile airframe, and we are proud to offer our customers a wide variety of options to help ensure their mission success.

“Our aerial firefighting configuration is highly successful in fighting U.S. wildfires in California and other western states, and we are thrilled to be able to internationally introduce these lifesaving platforms to Portugal.”

Arista is an FAA Part 145 Repair Station and provider of MRO services with facilities strategically located in Alabama and California. Arista specializes in depot level repairs, custom painting, custom avionics upgrades, structural enhancements and repairs as needed to extend the useful life of legacy helicopter platforms.

TracPlus launches new technology for aerial firefighting

by Projects

TracPlus has unveiled a “world-first” new product for aerial firefighters that will automate the time-consuming collecting and reporting of data now required to satisfy new industry standards.

National Aerial Firefighting Centre of Australia’s (NAFC) OPS-14 Standards now state that operators must accurately collect and report volume collected and dropped, engine starts and stops, and take-offs and landings.

For rotary aircraft, TracPlus said its AFDAU-T1 product removes the need for manual calibration of a bucket, meaning that no pilot interaction is required, even when swapping buckets in a slung load configuration.

For fixed-wing operators, the organisation said the device automatically detects operational data for reporting – including proof of substantive flow from a hopper.

The new tech was produced in collaboration with Sydney-based engineers Aircraft Maintenance Solutions.

“Our goal was to bring a dedicated aerial firefighting data acquisition unit to the market that had been designed to meet the NAFC event reporting contract requirements,” said AFDAU-T1’s lead engineer, Zane Vohland.

“With AFDAU-T1, operators don’t need to worry about data accuracy. They will have peace of mind that their data is reliable, automatic and accurate.”

TracPlus was founded in 2007 and its varied client list worldwide also includes Californian forest fire protection department CalFire and San Diego Gas & Electric.

Previously, Australian Aviation reported that TracPlus secured $5 million of funding from Kiwi tech fund Movac.

As part of the deal, the firm will acquire Cambridge-based v2track, which already supplies it with tracking devices.

Chief executive Trevor McIntyre said, “We had a number of funding options, and we chose Movac due to their investment style and ‘hands-on’ experience in growing successful tech companies.

“It was also really important to us that there was a strong personality fit between the two teams.”

TracPlus staff have already switched to working from home during the coronavirus crisis to allow clients such as aeromedical charity RACQ LifeFlight Air Ambulance to continue flying.

McIntyre said, “We have implemented measures to do what we can to support our operators who are at the face of COVID-19, keeping their teams safe, continuing to provide tracking, 24-hour distress and emergency monitoring to ensure operators can stay in touch with their people.”

www.tracplus.com/