Agricultural aviation services are characterised by seasonality related to the plant growth cycle and pest occurrence. In Poland, the dead periods were winter and the summer harvest season. Growing agricultural aviation companies therefore began looking for employment for their crews and aviation equipment during these dead periods. The Arab countries turned out to be such a place, constituting the largest market for Polish agricultural aviation services from the mid-1960s onwards. Many countries in the region had gained independence and were striving to increase agricultural production, both for export and to feed their own populations. The large cotton-growing areas there, at a time when demand was high and cotton was the main export commodity, as in Egypt and Sudan, as well as increasing cereal crops, required the use of greater quantities of aviation equipment.
Local agricultural aviation companies did not yet exist or did not have sufficient equipment and personnel. In Poland at that time, serial production of several types of agricultural aircraft and helicopters had begun, and there was a significant number of trained flying personnel. The periodic invasions of locusts and Quelea birds occurring in these countries required the rapid deployment of additional aircraft, and Polish companies had the equipment and personnel available domestically and could quickly put them to work. Moreover, our An-2 aircraft, with their long range and ability to operate independently in difficult terrain conditions, gave an advantage over small Western-manufactured aircraft. For work abroad, our crews received payment in hard currency (convertible currencies of capitalist countries), though it was significantly lower than for crews from Western countries. Similarly, the requirements regarding living conditions for our crews were not excessive, which made our contracts very price-competitive.
Polish agricultural aviation companies at that time were organisationally linked to aircraft manufacturers (WSK Mielec, WSK Okęcie, WSK Świdnik), which greatly facilitated the rapid acquisition of new equipment, spare parts, overhauls and service personnel. This gave a major advantage over small local firms. These factors therefore favoured the obtaining of foreign contracts. In most of these countries, we operated as subcontractors to local firms during periods of increased demand for work. These firms ensured fuel supplies and maintained contact with crop owners. In Sudan and Egypt, however, operations were conducted independently, relying only on local agents to meet tender requirements. All fuel supplies, transport and financial handling were on the Polish side. In accordance with the rules prevailing at the time, agricultural aviation enterprises as the main service provider could only enter into foreign contracts through foreign trade centrals. For agricultural aviation and the aviation industry, this central was Motoimport and later PHZ Pezetel. When carrying out foreign services, it was necessary to obtain visas and diplomatic clearances for overflight through the territories of countries along the route, permits for aircraft and crew operations in the country where services were performed, customs clearances and provision of financial resources for redeployment and contract start-up, and later collection of payments for work. These matters were handled by Pezetel.
After the political changes of 1989, enterprises could already conduct this scope of work independently. Matters of equipment and crew preparation were the responsibility of the main contractor. During contracts, due to health and accident risks, the team included Polish doctors and representatives of aviation supervision. In 1969, enterprises from COMECON countries concluded the so-called “Bucharest agreement”, which aimed at exchanging experience in technical, operational, training and flight safety matters, as well as providing mutual assistance during peak work periods. Most of these countries used Polish-manufactured equipment for agricultural aviation work. Under this cooperation, Polish aircraft and helicopters repeatedly worked in these countries. Similarly, in situations of greater demand for equipment in “hard currency” countries, aircraft from COMECON countries were contracted for work in Poland. It should be noted that only Poland and, to some extent, Bulgaria provided services in hard currency countries.
| No. | country | period of work | types of work | aircraft types | notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ALGERIA | 1974, 1975, 1988, 1989, 2004, 2005 | wheat spraying, locust control | An‑2, M-18, PZL‑106 | |
| 2 | SAUDI ARABIA | 1998, 1999 | palm spraying, locust and mosquito control | PZL‑106BT | |
| 3 | AUSTRIA | 1966–1970 | fertilising, spraying | PZL‑101 | |
| 4 | BULGARIA | 1956, 1964 | forest dusting | CSS‑13, PZL‑101 | |
| 5 | CHILE | 1999–2005 | forest fire fighting | M-18 | |
| 6 | CZECHOSLOVAKIA | 1984, 1986–1991 | liquid fertilising, spraying | An‑2, Mi‑2 | |
| 7 | EGYPT | 1967–1991 | cotton, wheat, palm and rice spraying | PZL‑101, PZL‑106, An‑2 | own maintenance base |
| 1975–1985, 1990–1995 |
water hyacinth, locust and mosquito control | Mi‑2 | |||
| 8 | ETHIOPIA | 1973–1988 | cotton and wheat spraying, food deliveries (UN) | An‑2, PZL‑106AS | |
| 9 | FINLAND | 1962 | field and forest fertilising | PZL‑101 | |
| 10 | SPAIN | 1988–1990 | fire fighting, pilot training | M-18 | |
| 1989 – present | forest fire fighting | Mi‑2, W‑3 | |||
| 11 | IRAN | 1985–2005 | wheat, cotton and palm spraying, pilot training, servicing Iranian M-18 aircraft | An‑2, PZL‑106BT | |
| 1973, 1977 | Mi‑2 | ||||
| 12 | CAMEROON | 1980 | locust control | Mi‑2 | |
| 13 | LIBYA | 1968, 1969, 1973–1975 | fertilising, palm spraying, grass seeding, sand stabilisation | PZL‑101, An‑2, Mi‑2 | |
| 14 | MALI | 1986, 1987, 1990–1993 | locust control, cargo transport | An‑2, L‑410, Mi‑2 | |
| 15 | NIGERIA | 1977–1979 | herbicides, sugar cane spraying, locust and bird control | An‑2, Mi‑2 | |
| 16 | GDR | 1973–1976, 1980, 1985–1990 | fertilising | An‑2, PZL‑106B, Mi‑2 | |
| 1984 | gypsy moth control in forests | 45 aircraft | |||
| 17 | PAKISTAN | 1976 | cotton spraying | An‑2 | |
| 18 | PORTUGAL | 1987, 1989, 1993–1995, 1999–2010 | forest fire fighting | M-18 | |
| 1989, 1990, 1996, 1997 | Mi‑2, W‑3 | ||||
| 19 | SUDAN | 1967–2009 | cotton, wheat, sunflower and sugar cane spraying; water hyacinth, locust, bird and mosquito control | PZL‑101, PZL‑106A, B, AS, BS, BT, An‑2 | own aircraft maintenance base, ground equipment and fuel and spare parts warehouses total flight time 194 000 hrs, 19 million ha sprayed |
| 1977, 1978 | Mi‑2 | ||||
| 20 | SYRIA | 1980, 1981, 1984 | wheat spraying | An‑2, PZL‑106AS, M‑18 | |
| 21 | TUNISIA | 1964, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983 | cereal and citrus spraying | PZL‑101, An‑2 | |
| 22 | HUNGARY | 1979, 1980, 1987, 1988 | fertilising | An‑2, PZL‑106 |
