Supply Chain LabAerial Bushfire Suppression - Multi-Agency CoordinationLab Home
Published research · Showcase Research & Showcase

Coordinating aircraft, crews & water to fight bushfires

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 61 (2021) 102352 · doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102352

Aerial firefighting only works when it's synchronised with ground crews and water resources. This study builds a bi-objective optimisation model that schedules aircraft, ground vehicles and reservoirs across many fire sites at once - minimising both total completion time and resource shortage - and a fast coordination heuristic to solve it at real scale. It's tested on Victoria's 2009 Black Saturday (Kilmore East–Kinglake) fires.

3
aircraft types - high-volume, winching, air-tanker
10
airfields as aircraft bases
4
fire sites, ranked by severity
2009
Black Saturday case study

The case study - Greater Melbourne

The 2009 Kinglake fire (red core, yellow spread), the airfields used as aircraft bases, reservoirs and CFA stations across the study region.

Greater Melbourne study-area map
Fig. 5 - Study area. Shahparvari, Bodaghi, Roozbeh, Mohammadi, Soleimani & Chhetri (2021), IJDRR 61, 102352. © Elsevier; reproduced by the author for teaching.

Multi-agency suppression, in motion

An original schematic. Aircraft (navy) cycle base → reservoir → fire, dropping water; ground crews (green) move in behind them. Scrub the mission clock, or switch coordination off to see suppression slow down.

t = 1 / 7
0%
fire suppressed
0 / 4
sites contained
46
completion time (steps)
0
resource shortage
fire site (by severity) aircraft reservoir / water ground crew airfield base

Fast enough for a real emergency

A greedy coordination heuristic is benchmarked against a genetic algorithm and an exact method across small-to-large instances.

Exact method
fails > 90 acts
Genetic algorithm
320 acts
Coordination heuristic
320 acts · ~5 min
~8% better

Heuristic vs GA

The coordination heuristic returns better schedules than the genetic algorithm, and the gap widens as the problem grows - while the exact solver can't reach large instances at all.

320 activities

Solved in ~5 minutes

Where the exact method stalls beyond ~90 activities, the heuristic schedules 320 activities in about five minutes - fast enough to support an incident controller under pressure.

Three what-if scenarios

Built around the Black Saturday context to stress-test the plan.

I · Baseline

With full resources, every operation is completed - the mission at the worst site finishes in 46 time steps with no shortage in the final step.

II · Resource shortage

When the largest aircraft is unavailable, the model reshuffles other resources across time steps; unmet-demand cost rises only slightly (~2%) and completion time holds.

III · Time limitation

Under a tighter window the model finishes ~11% faster by using resources from other steps - at the cost of ~16% higher unmet demand.

Why it matters

The plan lets fire agencies coordinate aerial and ground assets, prioritise the most severe sites, and act as an early-warning tool as a fire spreads.

Cite: Shahparvari, S., Bodaghi, I., Roozbeh, I., Mohammadi, M., Soleimani, H., & Chhetri, P. (2021). A cooperative (or coordinated) multi-agency response to enhance the effectiveness of aerial bushfire suppression operations. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 61, 102352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102352. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All visuals in this showcase are original schematics created to illustrate the concepts - not reproductions of the article's figures.

About this tool

Research: Aerial Bushfire Suppression

The concept

A research showcase on coordinating multi-agency aircraft for bushfire suppression.

How it works

Optimisation assigns aircraft to fires over time under range, refill and priority constraints.

Winning strategy

Explore the scenarios to see how coordination beats capacity.

assignment optimisation under spatio-temporal constraints
BushfireAerial suppressionAssignmentCoordination