Xavier Viegas warns of the risk of repeating past mistakes

The announcement of an investment in the acquisition of two modern kits to equip the Air Force's C-130 aircraft in the firefighting mission in Portugal (see text opposite) has reignited the debate over the suitability and effectiveness of these aircraft in the national context. Despite being robust aircraft known for their important role in military aviation, their size, weight, and operational capability continue to be questioned, at a time when Portugal is grappling with fires in the north and center of the country.

Domingos Xavier Viegas, director of the Forest Fire Studies Laboratory, who has monitored C-130 operations in the past, emphasizes that, from a technical standpoint, "despite their age, they are robust aircraft" that, "with proper maintenance, can be practically new, with zero flight hours."

However, Xavier Viegas maintains substantial reservations about its use in Portugal due to the aircraft's weight and size, exacerbated by the country's topography. He explains to Nascer do SOL that "Portugal, due to its terrain and the nature of its fires, rarely benefits from an aircraft of this size." He adds that past experience has shown that the use of C-130s rarely occurs under ideal conditions, as "these aircraft should never operate alone, but in pairs," to ensure an effective cadence during takeoffs, and this has not been the case in the past.

Furthermore, refueling times were long, taking up to an hour for the aircraft to return to combat, which made refueling very infrequent and, consequently, ineffective.

On the other hand, Xavier Viegas also laments that, because they are expensive resources, the C-130s were usually called in to fight the flames late, when the fires were already out of control, further reducing the effectiveness of the actions.

Conversely, the expert, known for his role in analyzing the tragic Pedrógão Grande fires of 2017, emphasizes that it would be preferable to use "lighter aircraft" with "higher launch frequencies," arguing that "instead of two C-130s, I would prefer four Canadairs." He finally recalled that countries like the United States are only able to use this type of heavy aircraft due to geographic factors and economic capabilities that Portugal lacks, ensuring the use of "fleets" of these aircraft—an opinion that conflicts with information shared by our newspaper (see pages 10 and 11).

In addition to technical opinions, there are also criticisms of the investment in C-130s for firefighting, suggesting that the size and operating methods of these aircraft are not suited to the mountainous terrain and small-scale fires prevalent in Portugal. Sources interviewed by Nascer do SOL also criticize the evaporation of water dropped from high altitudes, expressing a preference for faster and more adaptable means of combat, such as helicopters and light aircraft.

In response to questions from Nascer do SOL, João Paulo Saraiva, president of the Civil Protection Association (APROSOC), stated: "The intention is to deploy the C-130s to fight fires, and in our opinion, if it's for the use of fire retardant, it will be effective, but if it's only for dropping water, it doesn't add any value. It should also be remembered that this aircraft is not a seaplane and doesn't refuel at sea or rivers. It needs to refuel at an airport (and there isn't always one near the fire). It doesn't land or refuel at a regular Air Resources Center (CMA). However, we must not forget that government officials have announced the end of these aircraft's service life, an argument used for the purchase of the KC390s, another of whose arguments for acquisition was precisely their applicability in firefighting."