UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread [Archive]

roundwego

26th Mar 2013, 10:53

Have just seen a BBC news interview with Robert Fox who is the defence correspondent for the London Evening News. What an idiot. He is obviously being fed sh*t from the military. He was going on about how this is highly dangerous because the quality of training is going to plummet and that Bristow has had "issues" with the level of service in the oil and gas sector. He was actually comparing Bristow with G4s security at the Olympics !!!

He totally ignored the fact that Bristow has been doing SAR for coming on 50 years and has the longest pedigree as a worldwide helicopter operator in the world.

He was also going on about the number of medals that military crews get for "daring rescues" totally ignoring awards that civilian SAR members have had over the years.

I will stop now otherwise my rant would go on for at least three more pages:mad:

212man

26th Mar 2013, 11:12

He was also going on about the number of medals that military crews get for "daring rescues" totally ignoring awards that civilian SAR members have had over the years

Indeed. The recent GM going to last year's recipient of the Billy Deakin award!

Pity there is so much emphasis on Bristow being American - I'm sure AB is turning in his grave!

SASless

26th Mar 2013, 12:17

Gee....Crab will be wearing Ashes and rending his clothes over this!

We must get him counseling help to get him through this horrible crisis.

Anyone care to join in a Whip Round to fund the Professional help for him?

Proman

26th Mar 2013, 12:38

Bizarre, the comments about military training.

FBH - who are Bristow - already/currently train military SAR pilots and crew in the UK...the training will not change at all. And it will remain exemplary.

SASless

26th Mar 2013, 13:21

Pity there is so much emphasis on Bristow being American - I'm sure AB is turning in his grave!

There is a bit of spinning going on above ground due to that change of ownership too....especially when some folks are reminded of that!:E

Thomas coupling

26th Mar 2013, 13:45

A great result all round really.
One of the best helicopter operators in the western world utilising one of the best choices of helicopter.:ouch:
Bit of a hike if you want to visit the training centre though in Northern Scotland! What's the deal with Bristow's and Jim671 then? Did you rent out your garden to bulid the TRTO?
Brilliant news for Yeovil. The government and dare I say.....in the long run....the public.

jimf671

26th Mar 2013, 15:20

Did you rent out your garden to bulid the TRTO?

I'll ring ST and make sure he has read your suggestion TC.

Can't stop. Working on my CV. :-)

jimf671

26th Mar 2013, 16:53

Have just seen a BBC news interview with Robert Fox who is the defence correspondent for the London Evening News.

Howard Wheeldon has been on BBC Online and presumably radio. Dreadful. I think he first heard of this contract over breakfast this morning so then he went on the BBC and pretty much slagged off Bristow because nobody in the defence club had got the contract. If by some irrational miracle, Lockheed or Elbit had got it, presumably overpaid defence 4r53l1ckers would be all over the airwaves telling us how wonderful privatised SAR was going to be.

ericferret

26th Mar 2013, 17:49

Looked up Wheeldon. From his bio I dont think he's been near a live aircraft in his life.
How on earth the bbc can use an "expert" like this defeats me.

ericferret

26th Mar 2013, 18:26

See the BBC is changing it's tune.

Bristow is now an "Aberdeen based company"

jimf671

26th Mar 2013, 18:48

How on earth the bbc can use an "expert" like this defeats me.

They'll have chosen a Jim Ferguson replacement on the basis that this one has had a haircut. :E

MightyGem

26th Mar 2013, 20:36

He was going on about how this is highly dangerous because the quality of training is going to plummet
Obviously been talking to Crab. :E :E

jimf671

26th Mar 2013, 20:39

See the BBC is changing it's tune.

Bristow is now an "Aberdeen based company"

That's an improvement but they have also said ARMY and navy helicopters have been doing the job. :yuk:

I think their latest expert is a Buccaneer pilot. Talk of aeroplanes doing the job. :eek:

Macaco Norte

26th Mar 2013, 20:48

Just found these on the Company website:

SAR CO-PILOT- BRI00228

Description

Having been successfully awarded UK SAR, we will be seeking to fill positions for the contract.

If you are interested in working with us please submit your application online.

Qualifications

Must have an EASA/CAA CPL(H) or equivalent with twin IR.

Bristow require SAR Co-pilots with previous experience of;

· Total flight time of one thousand (1,000) hours on aircraft of which 500 hours on helicopters;
· Successful completion of the appropriate company approved training course
· All SAR Co-pilots must be instrument rated.
· No criminal record, safe flying record and the right to reside and work in the UK.
Job: Pilots
Primary Location: Europe, Middle East-United Kingdom
Schedule: Full-time
Number of Openings: 50
Job Posting: Mar 26, 2013, 11:42:01 AM
Unposting Date: Ongoing

SAR COMMANDER- EBU00407

Description

Having been successfully awarded UK SAR, we will be seeking to fill positions for the contract.

If you are interested in working with us please submit your application online.

Qualifications

Must have an EASA/CAA ATPL(H) or equivalent with twin IR

Bristow require SAR Aircraft Commanders with previous experience of;

· Two thousand five hundred (2,500) hours as Pilot-In-Command (PIC) of aircraft of which one
thousand (1,000) hours is as PIC on helicopters.
· At least one thousand (1000) flying hours in multi-engine helicopters each.
· At least two hundred and fifty (250) hours on type except where previous glass cockpit experience can be demonstrated in which case this requirement may be reduced but will never be below one hundred (100) flying hours on type.
· At least five hundred (500) flying hours previous military/civilian SAR helicopters experience.
· Successful completion of the appropriate company approved training course.
· All Aircraft commanders must be instrument rated.
· No criminal record, safe flying record and the right to reside and work in the UK.
Job: Pilots
Primary Location: Europe, Middle East-United Kingdom
Schedule: Full-time
Number of Openings: 50
Job Posting: Mar 26, 2013, 10:58:00 AM
Unposting Date: Ongoing

jimf671

26th Mar 2013, 22:06

It’s been a bit quiet from Crab so far today. Perhaps he is busy collating his medals and news paper cuttings and writing a CV

Is he in the hanger, talking to the techies about house prices in St Athan?

Thomas coupling

26th Mar 2013, 22:56

Jim, try NewQuay for Crab's CV.

How are the mil pilots going to get 250hrs required on type?

[email protected]

27th Mar 2013, 06:23

Mostly skiing in France:ok:

We will see what Bristows have to say about hours on type (clearly mil pilots won't have any) once their roadshow comes round the SAR flights and people start applying through the managed transition process.

onesquaremetre

27th Mar 2013, 06:35

The Aberdeen heritage matters little. In a land where the dollar is king and the dollar is increasingly hard to come by, any corporation run by oilmen, lawyers and number crunchers is only likely to be interested in one line. The bottom one. Can you really privatise a public service and not expect the profit motive to have an influence on what's output? :confused:

Lioncopter

27th Mar 2013, 06:53

Crab it might also be worth seeing if your bosses are now willing to let the Balpa roadshow come round now... As recently they were not keen at all..... :)

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 08:03

The DfT spec for aircrew experience was unchanged across both the February and September versions, though I suppose the unpublished final ITT could have been different. The figures in those documents are similar to what's in the Bristow ad shown above but the type and SAR figures are higher in the ad. Then there is the term in the DfT spec for the Commander that requires 'on each type' which does not appear in the ad.

[See ITT (19 Sep), Schedule 2.1, Specification, Section 2.3.1.]

Daysleeper

27th Mar 2013, 08:23

What is a safe flying record as required in the advert?

I keep my logbook in a fireproof steel box with a lock on it...:hmm:

Macaco Norte

27th Mar 2013, 08:53

So what exactly are the current SAR crews getting from Bristow on transition?
I would immagine a CPL(H) will be required at their own time/expense but with regards to IR & type rating what has been agreed? I presume the usual requirents for interviews/Psychometric testing will be discarded.

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 09:43

There is a whole list of people I would like to still have hovering over me 3 years from now and I hope no unreasonable obstacles will be placed in their way.

Fareastdriver

27th Mar 2013, 10:47

If anybody thinks they are going to walk into Bristow as an aircraft commander they are going to be disappointed. With loads of SAR hours they will do your converstion and stick you in the left hand seat until you have the necessary hours on type. Remember there are are already qualified and experienced captains who are at present working for CHC and they will just change over companies. There are also type captains in the company with military and civil SAR experience who would be at the top of the list to go from offshore support to SAR if they put their names down.

Don't pack in you day job until you know you have a better job to go to.

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 11:01

Of course, they only have three bases to roll-out with a current type.

Prsesumably, the glass cockpit clause kicks in for the rest. Not much help for SK drivers.

ericferret

27th Mar 2013, 11:50

I'm a little confused by the suggestion that military pilots are just going to move over to Bristow. I thought they all had contracts with H.M the Queen and they will just be posted to suitable new jobs unless they are declared redundant. Having spent a small fortune training these guys why would they be released? There must be through put in SH and surely these pilots (particularly the younger pilots) will become part of the pool for that thereby cutting the cost of recruiting and training ?

stilllearning

27th Mar 2013, 12:05

sorry about my lack of knowledge. Then Bond is not in the game??? didn't get any piece of the cake???:confused:

leopold bloom

27th Mar 2013, 12:17

Anyone know what the future holds for ARCC?:confused:

Genie the Greenie

27th Mar 2013, 12:19

100 pilots, 100 rear crew and 50 engineers!! these are not the standard oil & gas roundabout people who move around with contract changes, these are new positions. How much money will the oil compnaies throw at the operators to retain the service offshore with qualified staff? If that happens where are these drivers and mechs coming from for 2015??:confused:

snakepit

27th Mar 2013, 12:22

Jim the S92A is glass cockpit too.
Stilllearning
Learn quicker or read the thread

Happy days :-)

snakepit

27th Mar 2013, 12:31

Oh go on Stilllearning I will help you
Lot 1 5 bases of heavies (S92A)
Lot 2 5 bases of mediums (AW189)
Lot 3 all ten bases

Bristow won Lot 3
Simples?

ropedope

27th Mar 2013, 12:35

I believe we now all know the future of UK SAR post SAR-H. So can we now close this thread. Possibly open one on where do I send my CV if I have p'@@ed people off over the last few years on this boring thread.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

jonnyloove

27th Mar 2013, 12:42

I wonder out the advertised posts i.e. 50 X Winchmen 50 X Winch ops how many of the post will go to the guys and girls currently serving in UK Military SAR..?

Thanks all.

stilllearning

27th Mar 2013, 13:56

thanks snakepit. That makes it clear. Have a nice day ...:D

Bap70

27th Mar 2013, 13:59

Hi All,
Does anyone know what type of roster/shift pattern the current UK Civvy SAR
units work, or what pattern Bristow are likely to use??

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 14:42

I believe we now all know the future of UK SAR post SAR-H.

I don't think so.

The future is not clear until we work out a way of helping the customer's agent to understand 70% of the task they will be 'supervising' under their brand.

Rumour_Monger

27th Mar 2013, 14:44

As an outsider can I put me two penny's worth in here, the MoD are feeding a line talking about a managed transition and the availability of SAR crews to transition over to Bristow`s, but reading between the lines I do not think it will be as straight forward, obviously the spec are from the DfT tender docs, but do they reflect the introduction of a new helicopter, The S-92 has been around for a while but with the AW 189 which is a new type.

Bristow`s specs are calling for "At least two hundred and fifty (250) hours on type except where previous glass cockpit experience can be demonstrated in which case this requirement may be reduced but will never be below one hundred (100) flying hours on type." isn`t this going to be something hard to achieve?
·

Thomas coupling

27th Mar 2013, 15:32

There are still some stupid questions filtering thru, mainly because people can't be bothered to read thru this "boring" thread. I am guilty of that sometimes too:ugh:. So I will 'update' those latecomers and relieve them of the pain of reading so much stuff:

Bond got nought/nada/nuffink.
The ARCC decision is on hold due to the sensitivities surrounding a free Scotland and what might happen after the referendum. Expect to hear nothing until next year. My "personal" take on it:
IF Scotland remains part of Britain, then the ARCC will civilianise and move to Fareham where the MCA lives. MRS won't be far behind.

BALPA on MoD real estate..don't make me laugh. Why would the government allow a bunch of unionists onto mil territory to muddy the already sensitive waters? BALPA - The BA bit stands for British Airways...outside of this they are a waste of your monthly outgoings!:E

Ericferret/Genie the Greenie: You are not serious are you?? What do you think all these months of negotiations have been all about between the MoD and the tender companies? Where do you think Bristow is going to get its manpower if NOT from the mil??? Do you honestly think there are 200 aircrew sitting at home in civvy street waiting for the advert to come out? Of course the majority of ex mil SAR personel will transfer across to the new job (provided they have the relevant quals) and then Bristows will 'top up' with others from within their fraternity or from outsiders like CHC. Common sense appears to have krept in it seems!!! The whole "Managed Transition" process is designed around it.
A reminder too that the mil want rid of mil SAR. They want to reduce their troop numbers as per SDSR. Don't you remember?

And finally - any takers on what will happen to the Falklands. Perhaps the gov will hand it over to the Argentinian Navy:eek::eek:

ropedope

27th Mar 2013, 16:59

The future is not clear until we work out a way of helping the customer's agent to understand 70% of the task they will be 'supervising' under their brand.
Jim,

Who are "WE" to be helping someone who has had a five year break in delivering part of the UK SAR for the last thirty years. If you believe they don't understand 70% of the task then WE are all up that creek without the paddle.

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 17:29

I am hoping that most of us here want this to work and work well. Those are the we.

The 70% is the typical level of Land SAR tasking that the MCA wants to believe will somehow go away. Bristow properly understand this stuff.

In the 2001 Provision and Coverage Report there was criticism of record-keeping because neither the MCA nor MoD-DASA reporting gave a full and satisfactory account of the SAR task in the UK.

The MCA did not differentiate between land, coastal and maritime. Why should they? Well, because different bodies have statutory responsibility for land and maritime, with coastal always being a bit of a fudge.

MoD-DASA reported as though the UK, Cyprus and the Falklands were all the same country. Not clever.

That prevents the data being properly compared and prevents it being merged to produce a complete picture of the UK Aero SAR workload.

When the update report was published in 2006, nothing had changed, and again there was criticism in the report.

When I last checked, nothing had changed.

This stuff has been sitting there on the MoD and MCA websites. Are they not embarrassed? Are they too thick to understand?

Hopefully, Bristow will say to the Coastguard, 'We can take care of that' and by 2017/18 we will actually know what we are paying for.

ropedope

27th Mar 2013, 17:37

Thank you Jim, I have been enlightened, and it was a pleasurable experience. By which I mean eloquent and no bitchiness. Well done.:D:D

Lioncopter

27th Mar 2013, 18:04

I think if you ask a few of the people on the civil SAR bases if Balpa muddy the waters you might get a slightly different take ;)

sightlesseyes

27th Mar 2013, 19:01

TC
I think they'd easily get 100 winchmen (not winchwomen?) from current NHS paramedics, it's the 3 months experience in SAR that will be a stumbling block for them meaning that only current rear crew will be qualified to apply.

Surely at some point they will have to recruit ab-initios or their pool of skills will simply dry up?

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 19:14

Surely at some point they will have to recruit ab-initios or their pool of skills will simply dry up?

That's when this gets really interesting.

Macaco Norte

27th Mar 2013, 20:48

TorqueOfTheDevil

27th Mar 2013, 22:29

I guess the RAF always had a pool of experienced personnel to draw upon to fill their jobs. By this I mean RAF crews were born “ready qualified”

Everyone has to start somewhere otherwise the world would stop. Oh sorry I forgot – the world has stopped as far as old guard is concerned :ugh:

Oh dear. The point is that RAF rearcrew doing their first shift on a SAR flight will have had a year of dedicated SAR training at Valley (SARTU long course then Sea King OCU). This is on top of basic crewman training and most will also have done tours on SH. As a result, even those who are true ab initio have acquitted themselves extremely well in tricky SAROps in their first weeks and months on shift.

Could someone provide an idea of the proportion of civ rearcrew who have no previous mil experience, and what route those individuals took to get onto a civ SAR flight? I don't recall this being mentioned on here previously but I admit I haven't checked all 1400 posts...

Senior Pilot

27th Mar 2013, 22:41

I've split the threads so that all discussion on this new thread relates to UK SAR from the award of the contract to Bristow. Previous discussion is still here (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/444007-future-uk-sar-post-sar-h.html) for reference.

Let's not start the hamster wheel of previous discussions: any such posts will be moved over to the old thread, no need for them here :ok:

jimf671

27th Mar 2013, 23:11

I suppose once Bristow have redistrbuted its experienced SAR crews from their current bases to more favourable locations in the south, Mil SAR crews, once qualified, will have the pick of the rest, ie. Stornaway, Sumburgh, Inverness, Prestwick & maybe even Humberside.

You're probably right, if you love posing.

If you love flying, I expect 189 out of Inverness is where it will be at.

farsouth

27th Mar 2013, 23:16

once Bristow have redistrbuted its experienced SAR crews from their current bases to more favourable locations in the south

Most of the Bristow crews I knew in Sumburgh and Stornoway were there because they wanted to be - not everyone thinks the South of England is the garden of Eden...........

Bounce Bounce

28th Mar 2013, 00:39

Oh dear. The point is that RAF rearcrew doing their first shift on a SAR flight will have had a year of dedicated SAR training at Valley (SARTU long course then Sea King OCU). This is on top of basic crewman training and most will also have done tours on SH. As a result, even those who are true ab initio have acquitted themselves extremely well in tricky SAROps in their first weeks and months on shift.

Could someone provide an idea of the proportion of civ rearcrew who have no previous mil experience, and what route those individuals took to get onto a civ SAR flight? I don't recall this being mentioned on here previously but I admit I haven't checked all 1400 posts...

Open your eyes!!!!!!!!!!

heli1

28th Mar 2013, 06:46

Just picking up the earlier post from Rumourmonger It would seem AW139 experience will count for the big brother 189. AW make much of the commonality between the two types and CHC already have SAR crews able to transfer . Bristow is also flying AW139s and so s SARTU .

[email protected]

28th Mar 2013, 06:58

“We will introduce new helicopters to the UK equipped with the latest Search and Rescue technology that will deliver unprecedented levels and quality of SAR coverage across the country. The existing expertise and local SAR knowledge is immensely valuable and we will ensure that this is not lost.

“Bristow Helicopters Ltd knows the responsibilities that go with providing this service and we are committed to working in full partnership with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and ensuring a smooth transition process and the long-term continued delivery of a world class SAR operation in the UK.”

Straight from the Bristows web-site - they have set out their stall so shall we wait to see what the details are - they have a fairly major task ahead and no-one can afford for it not to work.

junglie jock

28th Mar 2013, 12:07

I was just wondering if anyone has any more info about the managed path? Is this a legitimate offer or just a way of our masters keeping bums or SAR seats until the end so their is no exodus of SAR qualified types? Would it be best to get IR done now to be ready or will Bristows provide? Will people already in Bristows be able to use seniority to get their choice of bases if they fit the requirements etc. I know details are still a little vague but I don't see any point on hanging on till the end if i can leave sooner and get more of a chance of getting a job where I want, although I have heard the Outer Hebrides are quite appealing!

jimf671

28th Mar 2013, 13:31

So, as an example, on 1st April 2015 at Inverness, in the back, would they want a guy from Den Helder or a guy who has spent years being dragged across rocks all over the NW Highlands and Grampians?

Reading the piece that Crab has quoted (or the DfT stuff), surely the latter has got to be the case.

onesquaremetre

28th Mar 2013, 16:05

Even the true blue free marketeers of the Telegraph seem to have figured out what's going on here.

Cartoon - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/cartoon/?cartoon=9956104&cc=9901446)

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02520/ADAMS20130327_2520653a.jpg

:D

junglie jock

28th Mar 2013, 17:11

If your reply was towards my question Jim, I see no drama for the rear crew who are trained as Paramedics getting a job in the place they want. To be honest, I see them being in more demand that the pilots. My question was more from the front seat point of view relating to training times/hours building etc. There are a lot of guys out there with the pre-requisite SAR hours and Glass cockpit time in the civil world. What I am asking is will it be a disadvantage to stick it out to the end in the military rather than jump now and get established with Bristows. i have a feeling this managed path maybe isn't all it is cracked up to be. :confused:

Al-bert

28th Mar 2013, 18:05

i have a feeling this managed path maybe isn't all it is cracked up to be. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif

then think of it as 'crazy paving' :cool:

hueyracer

28th Mar 2013, 18:12

There is no chance for military personnel to "jump over", as they require a minimum of 100 hours ON TYPE (for Captains-on AW189 or S92)...

jimf671

28th Mar 2013, 18:31

I refer you to the statement of our learned friend during a previous session.

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/511282-uk-sar-new-thread-3.html#post7762957

roundwego

28th Mar 2013, 18:35

There is no chance for military personnel to "jump over", as they require a minimum of 100 hours ON TYPE (for Captains-on AW189 or S92)...

Oh yes there is!

A type rating and a couple of months on oil and gas flights ex Aberdeen or Scatsta will get them to 100 hours very quickly on the S92. Not difficult to get AW time either. I am sure BHL will facilitate this very easily if required.

Fareastdriver

28th Mar 2013, 19:55

Most of the Bristow crews I knew in Sumburgh and Stornoway were there because they wanted to

and moved over to CHC to stay there. Now they will move back.

Should Bristow need experienced SAR S92 captains thay will either funnel experiencd SAR captains or an experienced S92 captains though the system as fast as possible.

Ticked all the boxes

28th Mar 2013, 20:58

So how do the current coastguard crews plan to become Nvg trained and experienced? I am sure some of the ex mil pilots will dust off the rust pretty quickly but even some of them may not have used Nvg before. It is a hugely demanding and different skill set in the SAR world. I fully understand the TUPE rules that are in play but will it be sensible to suddenly have crews with very limited nvg experience suddenly together on shift? Perhaps a safer bet would be to have a mixture of the managed transition crews in and amongst the current civilian crews.
I have the upmost respect for the coastguard crews. My point is merely a safety question as it takes a long time to become comfortable on nvgs and there may well be quite a few current sar captains without any Nvg time.
Personally I think it is very sad to be losing military sar. But I also see it as a great opportunity to mix strengths and overcome weaknesses that exist across all 3 current sar providers. If the right people are recruited then there will be a potent mix of experience and skill across the new sar flights around the uk. Hopefully that should provide two things; a great atmosphere to work in and a first class service to the public.
As long as the mil guys accept it is a new way of doing things and leave their attitude of 'we used to do it like this which was the best way' behind then I am sure we will all get on great!

jimf671

28th Mar 2013, 21:26

So how do the current coastguard crews plan to become Nvg trained and experienced? ... ...

For the crews at Sumburgh and Stornoway, by this time next year, this will be sorted.

At Lee and Portland, I do not know.

Variable Load

28th Mar 2013, 22:02

At Lee and Portland, I do not know.

So why would CHC train the crews at Lee and Portland for NVG use? No chance springs to mind!

Thomas coupling

29th Mar 2013, 01:19

It's not 'Managed Path" anymore it's: "Managed Transition" :ugh:

Current Mil crews will not be allowed a bespoke PVR unless they are offered a firm position in the new scheme. Those who elect to leave and NOT join Bristow's will be left to fend for themselves and do a normal PVR process.

Secondly, recruitment is NOW and the mil SAR encumbents have yet to await the outcome of what will happen to their pensions if they do benefit from a bespoke PVR and the results from this won't emerge before June (ish) I am told!!! So some nail biting there.:{
Finally, hueyracer, it isn't 100hrs on type it's 250hrs :eek:

This could scupper the whole deal, couldn't it? So what does this line in the advert really mean then?
Does it say: Bristows is confident there will be a controlled exodus from other aspects of its business into SAR, from currently qualified S92 drivers, which can then be filled by (possibly) mil sar crews leaving the service or will they realise they have over egged it and climb down / accelerate current mil crews thru to a lower 'type' qual entry level?
Currently NO mil crews can comply with this qual..............:ugh:

NVG is not a dark art (excuse the pun), it will easily be absorbed on the job. All mil crews are NVD qual'd. So they won't be a problem and the civvy crew will do OJ training. It is VERY straight fwd.

PS: I see Jamie is advertising for S92 SAR crews in Brunei and his requirement is a lower entry gate than this requirement. Better money too :D

212man

29th Mar 2013, 03:42

PS: I see Jamie is advertising for S92 SAR crews in Brunei and his requirement is a lower entry gate than this requirement. Better money too

Yes - it's a pity my thread highlighting that got 'modded' into the depths of the 'Rotary Jobs' thread so quickly! :(

[email protected]

29th Mar 2013, 07:05

NVG is not a dark art true TC but it is one that needs respect as complacency on NVG, especially in tricky terrain and poor weather, can be a killer.

The on the job training will be sufficient as long as there is a proper ground training package behind it so that the physiological problems and technological shortcomings of NVG are properly understood by those who are new to them.

Additionally there needs to be adequate continuation training to ensure that crews are setting them up and focusing them properly using something like a Hoffman box. NVG are often seen as a 'strap on and go' item that turn night into day - that works on a nice night in easy conditions but you need training to get the best out of the goggles.

Junglie Jock - as TC has said, the managed transition is the way to get directly from milSAR to SARH - what concessions will be made in terms of hours and IR we have yet to see - otherwise you have to apply in direct competition with the rest of the world which will mean sorting your own IR and possibly type conversion.

Geoffersincornwall

29th Mar 2013, 07:12

I don't think so. You had better check that a differences course will cover it. I reckon another TR is a strong probability. New engines and new avionics/displays usually mean a new type.

Certainly 139 folks will have a head start for the other systems are very similar but not identical.

G.

onesquaremetre

29th Mar 2013, 20:02

Bristow.com Financial News

Under the terms of this new SAR contract, Bristow Helicopters currently anticipates earning approximately $2.5 billion in revenue. Jonathan Baliff, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, added, "We believe that these contract terms and conditions are transformative from an operational and financial standpoint for our company. The number of helicopters operated, combined with the revenue and earnings generated under this contract, will create both a larger and lower risk company going forward."

"The total capital requirement for this project is expected to be approximately $1 billion, much of which is dedicated to the acquisition of 22 of the most technologically advanced, SAR-equipped S-92 and AW189 helicopters ever built.

Nice and cheaply does it.

Rigga

29th Mar 2013, 23:56

I think it was Alan Sheppard (1st US Astronaut, 1961) who said: "When I got into space I couldn't help thinking that all the parts of the craft were made by the cheapest bidders!"

Didn't do them any harm.

More lookout

30th Mar 2013, 07:57

Time to move on. MIL SAR is over, the true test is the test of time. The crews that will make up civ SAR I suspect will be no less determined to provide the best response to those in danger. I had a great time as a part of RAF SAR, but it could never last in these times of cost austerity. It became top heavy and expensive, just look at the shiney SAR force HQ built at valley. How much did that all cost?

Focus on the future.

John Eacott

30th Mar 2013, 08:17

Today's Daily Telegraph: (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9961455/Britains-search-and-rescue-helicopters-to-be-cut-by-nearly-50pc-in-new-deal.html)

The Ministry of Defence will retire its 40-strong fleet of Sea King helicopters from 2016, with the search and rescue aircraft being replaced with newer models provided by Texas-based firm Bristow in a £1.6 billion contract with the Department for Transport announced on Tuesday.
However, The Telegraph understands that only 22 new helicopters have been commissioned under the new contract – a shortfall of 45 per cent.
Ten of the new helicopters are believed to be AgustaWestland AW189s models and another 10 are thought to be Sikorsky S-92s, both four-bladed twin-engined crafts.
The new craft are expected to be 20 per cent faster than the existing Sea Kings and will be introduced from 2015 in a 10-year deal ending 70 years of search and rescue being run by the RAF and Royal Navy.
Richard Drax, Conservative MP for South Dorset, who has campaigned to prevent a search and rescue base in Portland from closing, condemned the cuts saying it would have a severe impact on safety.“However fast it is, one helicopter can only be in one place at one time," he said.
“I don’t care how fast they are, if they are tasked elsewhere, and you have less helicopters, what helicopter is going to come and do the job? So by cutting the number of helicopters, that’s a risk.
“The less helicopters and bases you have, the more likely a rescue helicopter will be on another task and will not be able to get where it’s needed, were there more helicopters and more bases.”
He added: “The integrity of search and rescue, by removing Portland, will be harmed, and my fear is – and I don’t want to be alarmist – that lives will be lost.
“Helicopters are notorious for breaking down, because there are so many working parts.”
The Ministry of Defence said front line services would not be impacted by the cut as only 16 of the existing Sea King fleet are deployed for search and rescue missions, with the rest undergoing maintenance or used for training.
Four of the 16 Sea Kings always in deployment are operated by the Royal Navy, while the RAF operates 12, with two helicopters on each base.
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) operates another seven helicopters, bringing the number of front line search and rescue aircraft to 23. Those seven, however, are in addition to the 40 aircraft run by the Ministry of Defence.
It was unclear whether those craft will be retired.
A MoD spokesperson said: “It is wrong to suggest the MoD operates 40 Search and Rescue helicopters at any one time. There are 16 operational Royal Navy and RAF Sea Kings - 2 at each of the 8 bases - which deliver the UK’s search and rescue service. The rest of the fleet are either in deep maintenance, used as part of training programmes or based overseas. These aircraft are not available for operations.
“From 2015, search and rescue services will be provided by 22 Bristow helicopters, under a contract awarded by the Department for Transport.”
A spokesperson for Bristow Helicopters admitted there would be no additional aircraft to replace any that are taken out of service but said the helicopters will all be kept fully-maintained and ready to fly, with spare parts always available if an aircraft needs to be serviced.
The company added that it expects 20 of the new helicopters to be used for frontline rescue operations, with two used for training or maintenance at any one time.
The Department for Transport insisted the new service would be better than the current one.
It said: "There will be an overall improvement in flying times to incidents of around 20 per cent (from 23 to 19 minutes).
“Presently, approximately 70 per cent of high and very high-risk areas within the UK search and rescue region are reachable by helicopter within 30 minutes. Under the new contract, approximately 85 per cent of the same area would be reached within this time frame."

Why does some of the flight time stuff remind me of discussions here prior to the NPAS decision? :hmm:

onesquaremetre

30th Mar 2013, 08:44

Nearly 600 comments in the Telegraph and not many of them positive. Who said the public didn't care about who was doing the rescuing?

If the Bristows financial officer says that capital expenditure will only be about $1 billion and they're going to be buying 22 helicopters at about an average of $20-30 million each (is that about right?), that doesn't leave much for other infrastructure expenditure etc at all the new locations. I'm assuming by capital expenditure he means INITIAL capital expenditure. Doesn't he? $3-400 million left over from the planned budget stretched over 10 years wouldn't go very far if he was quoting total planned capital expenditure.

fluffy5

30th Mar 2013, 09:01

Well I certainly like the cost savings coming in for the Aw189 with those four main blades.......

Fluffy

jayteeto

30th Mar 2013, 09:19

600 comments out of how many million? The scaremongering hasn't helped. I landed at a hospital HLS yesterday to be accosted by a family who told me that "it is being taken over by an American company who don't know what they are doing"!!!!!!
If taxes and council tax bills went up to pay for a military option, there would be uproar.

onesquaremetre

30th Mar 2013, 09:43

600 comments in a right of centre newspaper whose readership are generally well-educated and recognise the benefits that can be found in private sector efficiencies. Yet in this instance, a life-saving service that has set the standard for decades is being privatised for no other reason than to offload the public purse. I don't think they're that pleased - they know what private sector 'efficiencies' really means.

Fareastdriver

30th Mar 2013, 10:52

They can bleat as much as they like; it's all signed and sealed. The overwhelming majority of the 600 almost certainly have no idea of the intricacies of Search and Rescue.

The media will always look for the opinion of the people who are going to slag off something new.

It sells newspapers.

industry insider

30th Mar 2013, 11:41

The problem is that the UK is broke and can't afford the capital to replace the old up for retirement Sea Kings with S-92s

There are two options, lease or finance the replacement aircraft or privatise the whole thing and pay monthly for a service. It looks like privatising the SAR service also helps to downsize the military, which is also happening as a result of budget cuts.

The UK public need to realise that the old days of Britannia and her Empire are over.

How many people in the UK would willingly pay extra taxes for SAR which 99.9% of them will never be in a position to need or use?

Al-bert

30th Mar 2013, 12:07

jimf671

30th Mar 2013, 12:54

The UK public need to realise that the old days of Britannia and her Empire are over.

In which case we shouldn't really have taken on a million square miles, much of which should be covered by Greenland/Denmark, Iceland, Ireland and France.

SASless

30th Mar 2013, 13:26

Yet in this instance, a life-saving service that has set the standard for decades is being privatised.....

Errrrrr.....a Standard maybe....but not necessarily THE Standard.

cyclic

30th Mar 2013, 15:57

ex SAR pilot (21 Years) I am just surprised that it took so long to come to this. Over that time the RAF shrank almost year on year and the SAR force became just another career step for many people and huge amounts of cash were wasted in building HQ’s and empires with consequent jobs for senior officers

So true. Used to have Flt Lt flight bosses and the Squadron run by a Sqn Ldr. By the time I left we had Sqn Ldrs everywhere, Wg Co's at sqn HQs, more at SARF HQ and a Group Captain along with more at Group. The job hadn't changed and neither had the aircraft - go figure as they say.

Al-bert

30th Mar 2013, 17:57

Cyclic - couldn't agree more! In fact, that's what I said int'other thread :ok:
We had the best of it I believe :)

Helinut

30th Mar 2013, 18:26

Sounds like the modern way with most things - a vast explosion of middle managers who spend their time justifying themselves to each other. In the end it takes so long for something really important to trickle through that "opportunities and challenges" are missed.

heli1

30th Mar 2013, 20:38

Recent availability figures released by Sikorsky suggest a very high percentage for the S-92 so not unreasonable to assume they won't have25percent of the fleet in deep maintenance most of the time? But I have a question. Who/what wil cover the Falklands post 2017?

sudden twang

30th Mar 2013, 21:19

Rigga
Not sure Mrs Grissom would've agreed with you.

TorqueOfTheDevil

30th Mar 2013, 21:20

A [sic] MoD spokesperson said: “It is wrong to suggest the MoD operates 40 Search and Rescue helicopters at any one time. There are 16 operational Royal Navy and RAF Sea Kings - 2 at each of the 8 bases - which deliver the UK’s search and rescue service. The rest of the fleet are either in deep maintenance, used as part of training programmes or based overseas. These aircraft are not available for operations.

It shouldn't still depress me that even the MoD can't get the facts right, but it does...

a Standard maybe....but not necessarily THE Standard

Do elaborate?

Who/what wil [sic] cover the Falklands post 2017?

Never mind 2017, all the RAF Sea Kings will be gone by the end of 2015 (under current plans). Doesn't leave a huge amount of time, but no doubt something will turn up...

Geoffersincornwall

30th Mar 2013, 21:44

....... is they are

OLD

and

COLONIAL

Please humour him and agree that Brits can no longer make claim to be the best at everything. Sometimes the colonials are good at something...... like...

Cricket (Aussies - oh no, not these days)
WORLD series baseball (Yanks - but don't tell them that it was an Englishman that first drafted the rules of baseball)

But most of all don't say that we do SAR better than anyone else. It's not diplomatic and in all probability it's not true. If you do then SAS will get his big stick out and.... well woe betide you.

G. (wot no smiley with tongue-in-cheek)

MightyGem

30th Mar 2013, 22:53

However, The Telegraph understands that only 22 new helicopters have been commissioned under the new contract – a shortfall of 45 per cent.
It will be more effective, and more efficient. Well, that's what NPAS are saying about their decision to cut about 30% of Air Support aircraft. :rolleyes:

jayteeto

31st Mar 2013, 08:15

You know what I think of NPAS!! However they are using less of the same aircraft. This is a capability improvement with the S92.
Let us not kid ourselves, if the government are going for it, it will not be as good a service. My argument is that it will not be an awful service. It will "do a trip". Whilst the purists cannot accept this, the realists will understand that in the current financial climate, the public DON'T GIVE A TOSS about the SAR service. They are worried about paying for gas and electric, mortgages and holidays. They don't care if an aircraft takes 12 or 18 minutes to get to scene. When you are involved in a public service job, you always overestimate just how important you are. How many times have I heard military, police, NHS and Firemen say that the public "would never accept us being cut that far". Absolute tosh! They don't care, neither do the politicians, worse is still to come in the next 12 months. Live with it!! :(

[email protected]

31st Mar 2013, 08:19

Perhaps SaS should ask some of his fellow countrymen who have been the US CG exchange pilots over the years - all good men but all had to raise their game significantly to meet the 'standard' and all returned to the US as significantly better SAR pilots (some with medals from their UK exploits to prove they exceeded the standard)

The first one I flew with at SARTU was in the LHS of a Wessex for a winch weight check (up to 300' in an OGE hover and basic stuff as far as we were concerned) - at the end he said 'Wow that was awesome' - I commented that perhaps he didn't spend much time in the high hover in the USCG and he replied that he didn't spend much time in the low hover either:)

The Torygraph journos and readers should have expressed their concerns 10 years ago when the civilianisation was first mooted - but no-one gave a toss then because it wasn't a neat 'US firm makes millions from SAR' headline.

The only way is forward now to make it as good as it can possibly be for the sake of the 0.1 % of those taxpayers who really will need the best service in the world.

jimf671

31st Mar 2013, 09:52

Now let's see. 2 per base except one base with 1 a/c equals max of 23 a/c. 7 of them are at about 99% and let's be kind to the old girl and say 75% (sniggers behind hand).

So therefore we are moving from a realistic availability of 19 a/c to 21 or 22a/c and its a reduction.

Tell me if I'm way off target here.

mmitch

31st Mar 2013, 11:05

As an Innocent (tax paying) bystander can anyone tell me if there are real penalties if someone is left in a life raft or on a mountain for 'an unacceptable time'? As these days the 'blame game' involves passing the buck from one to another alah NHS, can we be any more sure of SAR?
mmitch.

John Eacott

31st Mar 2013, 11:12

Just to stir the pot: if a 189 is down then I assume the S92 stands in short term (assuming the one spare 189 is allocated elsewhere/unserviceable) and equivalent/better coverage is available.

What if the S92 is down and no spare 92 is available? Aren't the two types of different ranges and capability, so the second aircraft at the affected location may be unable to achieve the range required for the job?

All the SAR machines being phased out are of a like type and like capability: to infer that numbers alone are the criteria to be considered seems a blinkered view. A 189 doesn't seem to be a subsitute for either an S92, nor for a SAR Sea King.

Shackman

31st Mar 2013, 11:31

You do the best with what you've got. When we had two types in yellow I certainly stood in for Sea Kings with a Wessex, whilst I can also remember a Sea King standing in for us when both our Wessi were u/s.

jimf671

31st Mar 2013, 11:42

John, both types have some capabilities that exceed the DfT spec. As I understand it, we can't be sure of the 189 range until SAR prototype PT6 has been put through its paces from May or June onwards but I'm not expecting small numbers. Likewise with cabin accommodation, the 189 is expected to exceed the Lot 2 spec and approach the Lot 1 spec. The S-92 is a fat bar steward and its accommodation cannot always be fully utilised if the fuel load is high.

SASless

31st Mar 2013, 12:46

Crab,

Do you use an Extension Ladder to get up on your Horse?:ugh:

[email protected]

31st Mar 2013, 12:58

No - do you ever take your 'all is best in US' blinkers off?

212man

31st Mar 2013, 13:00

As an Innocent (tax paying) bystander can anyone tell me if there are real penalties if someone is left in a life raft or on a mountain for 'an unacceptable time'?

Why are they going to wait for an unacceptable time?

ukv1145

31st Mar 2013, 13:13

jimf671

31st Mar 2013, 15:30

... tell me if there are real penalties if someone is left in a life raft or on a mountain for 'an unacceptable time'?

When the court hears that they did not provide a valid postcode in their Mayday, surely there will be no case to answer? :rolleyes:

[email protected]

31st Mar 2013, 16:08

Just because someone gets themselves into trouble, does not guarantee they will be rescued - it never has and it never will - you need the crew, the aircraft and the weather to perform the rescue.

The Captain of the aircraft is responsible for the safety of his aircraft and crew over and above that of the casualty and there will always be some situations where the risk to life of the crew outweighs the enormous will and desire to rescue the casualty.

Talk of unacceptable waits for rescue is pointless - someone who is bobbing in a raft (unless with a life threatening injury) is a far lower priority than someone clinging to a rockface who is a lower priority than someone being swept away in the dark by flood water.

Unless you want hundreds of helicopters ready to rescue everyone all the time, you will never give absolute certainty but, by the time you add in the RNLI, the Coastguard ground units, the mountain rescue organisations, the police, fire and ambulance crews and the many volunteers out there, the UK provides a fairly comprehensive safety net for those in trouble.

Norma Snockers

31st Mar 2013, 16:19

Just to confirm, there will be a duty and a spare aircraft at each base. It will take 2 aircraft to become unserviceable to take a base offline. In which case the spare from another base or the designated spare could be used.

Except they do not provide any additional crews to ferry the aircraft around. You do your 24 hour shift then go home, no air testing or ferrying etc because that will cost the company extra money in overtime!
Same goes for BIG jobs where in the past the military have sent 2nd aircraft from the same base (I have done lots of these), under the new regime, this will no longer happen. But hey the one aircraft they will provide can get there 20% quicker so it must be alright :)

[email protected]

31st Mar 2013, 16:30

Al-bert

31st Mar 2013, 16:45

it is not the same as it was in the 80s and 90s.

sadly not. WIWOW I can only remember a couple of times that we went 'off state' in 11 years, and many times both aircraft were out at the same time, and even a third if we had the Sqn/SARTS spare. Even at night, when we had no seconds commitment, I recall seconds being launched (Lockerbie, ferry Norona etc - and that was with Sea Kings, albeit somewhat younger SK's).
Great days, what went wrong? Ananuvver thing, in 21 years and 800+ 'rescues' I never got to rescue a FJ mate - they were all picked up by Boulmer, Leconfield or Colt - now what might be wrong with the new plan I wonder? :hmm:
ps do we still have any FJ's? :ouch:

Norma Snockers

31st Mar 2013, 17:04

But we haven't had the second standby crew availability (except on an opportunity basis) for a few years now and the serviceability at many flights has been patchy to say the least. In the last 12 years I have done less than a handful of seconds call-ins - it is not the same as it was in the 80s and 90s.

But even in the last few months (floods, tornado crash at Lossiemouth etc) we've got second crews in even though we do not formally hold seconds! Partly because we are paid 24/7/365 and also because we don't have a union that would demand overtime pay.
I can't help feeling that our lack of pushing seconds is less to do with our manning crisis and more to do with easing the transition to the takeover where they will not provide a surge capability, that way they can say we haven't provided one for years when in actual fact we still can and do!

Al-bert

31st Mar 2013, 17:19

Norma - did things change when they contractorised the ground crew?
It occurred just after I left but I can recall more than a few occasions when ALL our available GC's pitched in to keep the flight (and seconds under a certain wee Jock Chiefy) on state (WX gearbox change, double engine change in field etc). I also noted a 'commitment shift' in some of the younger aircrew I encountered (on Sea Kings) who were more interested in ISS, ATPL's or OU than keeping the flight 'on state' at all costs and some had an unfortunate willingness to snag the old girls! :*

Norma Snockers

31st Mar 2013, 17:36

Certainly in the early days they did, before the company realised that they needed a) more people than they thought and b) people with SK experience!
They are better now. For the "big" jobs, they do not bring in all the off shift eng's (overtime you know) but they will provide a roaming "tiger team" if and where it is required.

meanttobe

31st Mar 2013, 18:20

Now let's see. 2 per base except one base with 1 a/c equals max of 23 a/c. 7 of them are at about 99% and let's be kind to the old girl and say 75% (sniggers behind hand).

Spare a thought for the Irish SAR contract. 4 bases with only 5 S92 aircraft. :ok:

jimf671

31st Mar 2013, 18:29

If Charlie November had not ditched, perhaps the UK would have had a 15 aircraft contract.

Lioncopter

31st Mar 2013, 18:38

Norma

The coast of paying overtime to a ferry crew is nothing compaired to the cost in fines with going off-state... it is a no brainer.....

I have have been part of a "seconds" coastguard crew, a situation arose with flooding, a base was asked if we could generate a second crew and aircraft, when we did.... we were told we were not needed and no request had ever been made.... Not one member of that crew asked about overtime or days off...

I think the Mentality of the people (pilots, rear-crew, engineers) doing the job is the same no matter what it says on the side of the aircraft.

.....and yes you do still have some FJ... we know as they are all going to be flying round the north off Scotland in about two weeks!

;)

Baldeep Inminj

31st Mar 2013, 19:22

Interesting too is the managed path the RAF have created. Take it from me, it is a work of fiction. Min req for a SAR captain will be 500 hrs on type (ask bristows, they'll tell you). They are hiring NOW to fill their SAR slots, putting guys on the oil and gas run, to get the hours up. They are recruiting like crazy. Any mil SAR guy will need to be out the RAF/RN and able to work for Bristows THIS year or they have well and truly missed the boat. The managed path is a myth to stop people pvr'ing.

Check with Bristows. The RAF guys will almost certainly not see a SAR seat unless they are prepared to work for years as a low paid co.

Don't take my word for it, check for yourself. I did.

Hedski

31st Mar 2013, 19:40

Not sure which co's are low paid now that Bond management have changed and caught up with the rest to prevent rated P2's leaving. As for that work of fiction the RAF created, it must be as they never created the existing one, useless as it is. That despite senior MoD officials promising jobs for the boys.....:ugh:
The hours on type are a contractual requirement, it's always been the case in CivSAR for both P1's and P2's.
2 machines per base is the figure quoted, every base that is. As it stands the current S92 bases averaged 97-98% plus serviceability over the last 5 and a half years.

Ticked all the boxes

31st Mar 2013, 19:47

All the mil sar guys will get a chance to ask Bristow at their road shows. If there really is to be no managed path or reasonable route into a relatively well paid job (co or capt) then watch the pvrs fly in and the whole wheels will come off an already barely manageable manpower plot. Could be interesting!

212man

31st Mar 2013, 20:15

Check with Bristows. The RAF guys will almost certainly not see a SAR seat unless they are prepared to work for years as a low paid co.

Top of scale Flt Lt is about 45,000 and Sqn Ldr about 57,000. Even with flying pay on top, starting as an SFO is likely to be a pay rise!

Baldeep Inminj

31st Mar 2013, 20:49

Incorrect. Plenty of PA flt lt's on over 70k, some on 75k plus. Check the payscales online. And as PA, there is no flying pay...it's all pensionable.

[email protected]

31st Mar 2013, 20:59

Baldeep - excellent name btw, took me a couple of readings to get it;) is correct ref PA pay.

212man

31st Mar 2013, 21:08

. Check the payscales online. And as PA, there is no flying pay...it's all pensionable.

I did! Clearly the MOD websites are inaccurate (here's an examples http://www.raf.mod.uk/community/getmedia/downloader.cfm?file=4A14ED24-5056-A318-A8F211CF1B131779)

Ah, just found the PA scales! http://www.raf.mod.uk/community/getmedia/downloader.cfm?file=6738FAA1-5056-A30A-091B9BC7740EE0B6

Norma Snockers

31st Mar 2013, 21:19

212man, the first link had the more up to date rates for PA spine, you just had to scroll down further :) (page A-6)

212man

31st Mar 2013, 21:27

NS - so it does! It also lists the SP(F) rates - how do they tie into the PA concept? Thanks

Norma Snockers

31st Mar 2013, 21:33

212man, they don't, hence the higher rates of pay in the PA spine. The biggest difference is that PA pay is ALL basic pay, so it is all pensionable :)
SP(F) is classed as additional pay and therefore doesn't count in a normal Flt Lt aircrews pension.

212man

31st Mar 2013, 22:00

So presumably the Spec Aircrew concept has been subsumed into this PA spine scale? Jeez - blink and you miss it!

ericferret

31st Mar 2013, 22:24

The PVR's might fly in but unless something has changed they do not have to be accepted do they?

Not an ideal situation to have unhappy people flying, however I am sure that the professionalism we have heard so much about on the SAR thread will prevail.

After all when you sign on and take Betty's shilling you are doing so as a member of the armed forces not as for example a SAR pilot. Bars on PVR have been applied before. An example being the army bar on aircraft technicians leaving by PVR as Lynx was comming in to service due to the requirement for more staff.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in respect of the hours required is that such things are set in conjunction with insurers. They lower time the pilot the higher the premiums.
I wonder if the aircraft are being insured commercially or whether the government is offering some form of indemnity.

jimf671

31st Mar 2013, 23:01

... I wonder if the aircraft are being insured commercially or whether the government is offering some form of indemnity.

ITT Schedule 7.6, Required Insurances:

Part 1
1. Property Damage "All Risks" Insurance
2. Third Party Public Liability Insurance
3. Motor Vehicle Insurance
Part 2
1. Aircraft Hull "All Risks" Insurance
2. Aircraft Hull War Risks Insurance
3. Aviation Liability Insurance (including Products Liability)
4. Errors and Omissions Liability Insurance for Paramedics

Thomas coupling

1st Apr 2013, 00:35

For goodness sake, it's MANAGED TRANSITION.

Secondly, the ad is asking for 250hrs on type...where's the 500hrs on type come from?

jayteeto

1st Apr 2013, 06:45

Don't panic too much, whatever job you take on leaving the services is GENERALLY going to mean a pay cut. As a police/AA onshore captain, you are looking around the 45-50k (ish) figure all in, no flying pay. One of these so called offshore low-paid co-pilots will not be too far from that figure as a starting salary. A pension certainly offsets that difference as well.
Unless you have a mansion to pay for, this is not a bad old wage in civvie street, you just get used to the higher military money and think you actually deserve it. Once you make offshore captain, you can resume bathing in ass's milk. :ok:

jimf671

1st Apr 2013, 07:48

Damn the pay scales. The ones I want hovering above me are the ones who just want to fly. I know they're out there. Bristow will let them do that in a really interesting way until they are 60.

I've met the ones who go on and on about what they could be earning somewhere else every time they get a cup of coffee in their hand and do so miss the boarding school allowance. Well crack on mate, we'll have a whip round for your bus fare and remember to wash your cup before you leave.

onesquaremetre

1st Apr 2013, 08:02

They are hiring NOW to fill their SAR slots, putting guys on the oil and gas run, to get the hours up. They are recruiting like crazy.

Having a few hundred hours on type flying to oil rigs hardly makes a qualified pilot a SAR captain.

Check with Bristows. The RAF guys will almost certainly not see a SAR seat unless they are prepared to work for years as a low paid co

This would be crazy. Why would they ignore the years of experience someone has built up as a SAR captain when it's absolutely essential for Bristow to prove to doubters that they can adequately replace military SAR?

[email protected]

1st Apr 2013, 08:13

212man - the transition from spec aircrew to PA spine happened about 10 years ago - shortly before the new pension system AFPS 05.

Neither were difficult decisions to make - more money now AND more money later........a no-brainer really and it made a huge difference to a Flt Lt pension.

As for PVRs - theoretically they can hang on to you for as long as they like but I'm not sure that has ever been applied or tested - normally the maximum wait is 12 months (or 6 months if you are over 50).

If the managed transition doesn't work and mil guys are offered poor terms and conditions then they may try to PVR and be held which (if not on PA) loses them flying pay. Morale will go down the tubes and the number of stress-related groundings will go up leaving bigger and bigger holes in the manning plot.

This will be a significant flight safety risk which is why it is in everyone's interests to make the transition work.

Trying to screw over ex-mil with reduced wages (because they have pensions) will mean the good guys will go for other options leaving the contractor to pick up only those who have no other choices - not trhe best way to ensure a smooth transition retaining high quality SAR experience around the UK is it?

I don't think any of us would have a problem with sitting in the co's seat offshore for 6 months to gain hours on type providing the guarantee of the captaincy at a specific SAR flight thereafter was honoured. That way you satisfy your hours on type requirement, get to know the individuals and retain the SAR experience and enthusiasm you hired them for in the first place.

All that is required is mutual trust and honesty.

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 08:47

Onesquaremetre

I agree wholeheartedly with you...didn't say I thought the Bristows way made sense, just that it is so. They are a Union Shop, don't forget...the day you join is more important than quals.

And remember too they have a LOT of ex-mil SAR guys flying the rigs, with seniority and hours. Who do you think will get the SAR slots?

I reiterate, RAF SAR guys can get a Bristows SAR slot, but they need to leave the RAF yesterday in order to do it. Bristows need to be manned, trained and operationally ready in every sense, BEFORE mil SAR dies. Those still on mil SAR will have well and truly missed the boat.

Flaxton Flyer

1st Apr 2013, 09:08

Crab said - "The only way is forward now to make it as good as it can possibly be for the sake of the 0.1 % of those taxpayers who really will need the best service in the world"

Given that the Uk population is around 62 million, by my reckoning that would mean SAR carried 62,000 patients last year. I never realised it was so dangerous living here...

SASless

1st Apr 2013, 09:23

I don't think any of us would have a problem with sitting in the co's seat offshore for 6 months to gain hours on type providing the guarantee of the captaincy at a specific SAR flight thereafter was honoured.

So....you are saying you would suffer the agony of being a Co-Pilot for up to Six months so long as you get to keep your same old seat as you have now and become a Captain after six months with the company along with a new Type Conversion thrown in for good measure?

My....you don't want much do you?

I can see the seeds for a very happy crew room.:rolleyes:

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 09:41

Crab, check pm's

[email protected]

1st Apr 2013, 09:46

And remember too they have a LOT of ex-mil SAR guys flying the rigs, with seniority and hours. Who do you think will get the SAR slots? And how many of them quite like their pay and conditions offshore and might not want to go to 24 hour SAR shifts, middle of the night callouts, winching in unpleasant and sometimes dangerous positions, night mountains etc etc?

So....you are saying you would suffer the agony of being a Co-Pilot for up to Six months so long as you get to keep your same old seat as you have now and become a Captain after six months with the company along with a new Type Conversion thrown in for good measure? If that is what pacifies the insurers, satisfies the DfT and MCA and ensures that the quality of SAR provision is maintained in UK for the next 10 years then no, I don't think it is asking a lot really. We already spend half our time as co-pilots, even when we are captains so it is hardly agony - it is one of the strengths we bring, competency and currency in both seats.

cyclic

1st Apr 2013, 09:52

And how many of them quite like their pay and conditions offshore and might not want to go to 24 hour SAR shifts, middle of the night callouts, winching in unpleasant and sometimes dangerous positions, night mountains etc etc?

and the North Sea in winter at night is a walk in the park. It happens every night as well during the winter. Relentless would be the word for it. Some of us might be happy to swap it....

jayteeto

1st Apr 2013, 09:53

SASless, totally agree with you. The opportunities WILL be there for some, but a HUUUUUGE reality check will be needed by a lot of military pilots. When leaving the military, I applied for a job 10 years ago, supplying a very comprehensive CV. The interviewer complemented me on my preperation and interview, then proceeded to tell me that my total lack of civil experience meant I would not be able to hold the position until I completed 6 months as a line pilot. The conditional offer was given, but the basing did not suit me at the time.
Military chaps, do not underestimate the power of unions and seniority lists. You may be good, but good only gets you a foot in the door. If you have realistic expectations, you will soon progress up the ladder, just be patient.

SASless

1st Apr 2013, 10:22

The only real problem with hiring Military Pilots for civilian flying is convincing them they are no longer in the Military....Rank means squat....and that "Attitude" is everything.....and the way they did it in the Mob holds little water in the new organization they have joined.

No matter how great your abilities and background are from your military days....cop the wrong attitude in the new place and it gets very...very...cold.

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 10:50

Sasless..spot on old chap. The guys on the SAR force have a HUGE reality check coming. But rather than believe me, Crab, you or anyone else, they just need to go and have an interview with Mr Bristow. All will rapidly become clear. If they want SAR, they need to leave asap and can ecpect a good couple of years on the rigs before even being considered for SAR.

I am in a position to know this.

Macaco Norte

1st Apr 2013, 11:11

In a position to know? Where are Bristow currently recriuting?

[email protected]

1st Apr 2013, 11:25

Baldeep - thanks for the pm - but if what you are saying is true then Bristows are not playing fair with the MoD and DfT which seems unlikely. Without the managed transition, the only option is mass PVR which will screw UK mil SAR for its last 3 years - the Govt don't want that and the MoD don't want that.

Jayteeto - I fully take your point regarding the jobs market but the SAR transition is a unique situation where the contractor can't allow a sudden drop in capability as the milsar machine grinds to a halt - they can have as many guys (ex-mil or not) working offshore as they want but that just provides drivers airframe, not SAR-current pilots.

Unless some mil crews (especially rearcrew) are taken on directly then there will (unless a new civ SAR school is being setup now to run a whole load of guys through in the next 2 years) be a problem since 80% of current UK SAR crews are presently wearing green - where are Bristows going to get current, competent SAR crews from?

If they are relying on ex-SH guys who have gone to the N Sea claiming SAR experience from Afghan and the like, they will be very embarrassed once the first callouts occur.

Sasless - what is wrong with a professional attitude? Surely an employer wants the best qualified and experienced employees to do the jobs if they are to provide a service safely and efficiently. There are very few rank-concious members of the RAF SAR Force - the union men and those 'time in the company' types are far more likely to cause friction in crewrooms than your average mil SAR boy or girl.

Al-bert

1st Apr 2013, 11:48

Sasless,
rank never meant very much in RAF SH or SAR. It's differant from what I saw of US army helos, and our RN and Army of course! RAF helos were always devoid of mil bull****, but that might have changed :bored:

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 12:41

Macaco

I clearly said that rather than believe me people should speak to Bristow and get the facts for themselves.
Your supposition will not help anyone. I support the mil guys, and I want them,flying SAR, thats why I posted some facts.

Simply ask Bristows.

snakepit

1st Apr 2013, 12:47

Baldeep
But the first "fact" you posted was incorrect. Its 250 hours on type not 500. So by all means suggest people go to Bristow just don't add your personal case into the mix and assume it will be the same for everyone.

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 12:57

Snake,

Good spot...almost. 250 will get you in the door, but 500 is req. for an op captain. They will make up the extra 250 hrs on the north sea.

As I have said, speak to Bristows. In any event, 250 on type still rules out all the ex mil guys. They'll be co's at best, and captaincy will be dead mans shoes. Not like RAF sar where captains fly as co's...a civvy company won't pay a captains salary to a co if they don't have to. Once they have enough captains, they have enough captains.

One35

1st Apr 2013, 13:07

From the Bristow website...

At least two hundred and fifty (250) hours on type except where previous glass cockpit experience can be demonstrated in which case this requirement may be reduced but will never be below one hundred (100) flying hours on type.

This is going to be a problem for many, not just the MilSAR guys. Although there are a fair few captains currently flying crew-change who may have the 500 hrs previous SAR experience, most will be operating the EC225 / AS332 L/L2. The S92 presence is increasing but it's still the minority on the North Sea. And as for the AW189....:uhoh:

SASless

1st Apr 2013, 13:09

Crab,

Professional performance and attitude is what the job calls for....without any single uniform colour being designated. Likewise, the Military guys and gals need to remember they are LEAVING one home for another and must be happy with the colour of the curtains until they have been in place long enough to get their feet under the table.

As in so many other things in helicopter flying....there is sometimes more than a single right answer to a question....and that is what has to be accepted by the newcomer. If there is a better way to do something then that can be worked out over time.

As the goal for all is to aid folks in distress....that should make it a lot easier to find the common ground without folks staking claim to having the only answer. As the Bristow SAR Operation has historically drawn from the Military...things should not be all that different where it matters....in the Air.

Admin policies and other mundane stuff will be different but the standards will not be. There definitely shall be a new set of "Bosses" to answer to with different personalities than one might be used to dealing with....for sure the system works much differently.

One thing that has not been discussed is what happens if Bristow splits off the SAR Operation into its own Business Unit and thus separates the SAR from the Offshore Business. That would make for a much easier way of transitioning Military SAR Qualified Crews into the Civilian SAR Structure.

PHI in the USA did that very thing with its EMS Operation as the Offshore and EMS work was so different both Operationally and Administratively.

If I were the Mandarin in Charge....that is what I would do.

Anyone want to make a wager how long it takes for that to happen?

Macaco Norte

1st Apr 2013, 13:44

SAS,
I'm sure SARBU will emerge, its what CHC already do and makes perfect sense as it would clearly define budgets.

Ian Corrigible

1st Apr 2013, 14:05

7 of them are at about 99%
Bristow may have committed to a higher figure for UK SAR, but FYI Sikorsky puts the official S-92 fleet OA figure for 2012 at 95.0% (vs. 94.9% for 2011).

I/C

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 15:19

Pretty rubbish troll if I am asking people to get the facts for themselves! Tell you what, ignore me, sit back, and wait for the managed transition. I'm sure you'll be fine :hmm:

jimf671

1st Apr 2013, 15:22

... Sikorsky puts the official S-92 fleet OA figure for 2012 at 95.0% ...

That figure will be for a quite different operational tempo of course.

I accept that 99 is an exageration. I did see a figure of 98% somewhere. Requirement or target, I cannot remember.

Norma Snockers

1st Apr 2013, 15:43

ignore me, sit back, and wait for the managed transition. I'm sure you'll be fine

So am I, thank you :)

[email protected]

1st Apr 2013, 16:23

Now does anyone know a good employment lawyer who can answer the question of TUPE applying to mil personnel in the SARF?

Is the managed transition a method of determining who will be transferred across since the service provision of SAR UK is simply being transferred from RAF/RN to Bristows?

I know that Bristows wouldn't want to take on the mil pensions liability but those should get paid from the MoD budget anyway.

Any thoughts?

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 16:29

Crab, as I understand it, nobody is bring 'transferred'. You simply leave the RAF, then join another company. This is no different than joing any company and pvr'ing...there is no special arrangement for this situation. The deal published daid, in essence, If you apply and get offered a job then you can pvr!

Like it has always been then.

Hummingfrog

1st Apr 2013, 16:52

Baldeep Inminj

Actually Crab has put up an interesting point.

At the moment the SAR contract is run by the RAF.

A new company, Bristow, has been awarded this contract.

Now substitute SAR for say the BP contract to the West Sole Alpha in the central N Sea. Substitute CHC for RAF and Bristow remains the new company.

Now TUPE did apply when this happened so what is the difference??

HF

NRDK

1st Apr 2013, 17:07

Interesting logic? Since the RAF have half of the commitment only....blah blah, Not quite a fixed contract, one third is contracted to the contract. RAF=no contract...

No special licence deals from the CAA, thanks to your paymasters.
Join the rest of the job queue like everyone else.
Do time as a co-jo like everyone else.
If you make the grade (not guaranteed Crab!) then a captains slot beckons.

Talk to the Bristow team and hear how it is. You won't be on a TUPE deal.

P.S. leave your superior RAF attitude at Valley/EGDC etc you'll fit in.:D

Macaco Norte

1st Apr 2013, 17:30

Hummingfrog,

TUPE wouldn't apply, as you well know, using the analogy you have. If you had been type qual'd (& a little younger) you would be Bristow, as would the others that were let go with you.
So 'type' would nullify TUPE.

Putting aside TUPE, Mil SAR crews are a must for Bristow & they know it. It's just a case of making it work. That may become the stumbling block.

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 18:09

Macoco,

Good point, but the stumbling block is surmountable. Bristow do need mil crews, and yes, they know it. They are absolutely determined not to be the next G4S. They are overcoming this by recruiting NOW. They will hire hard and fast until they have enough people. That is how they will overcome it.

Current mil SAR guys, I say again, need to apply now, and get out the mob asap.

Please guys, speak to Bristow soonest. Every guy who gets hired is one less slot for you to fill. And they are hiring as we speak.

212man

1st Apr 2013, 18:37

For those who haven't found the dedicated Bristow (with only one 's' :ugh::ugh::ugh:) website, here's the application form for 'managed transition' applicants: Managed Transition Existing UK SAR Personnel | Bristow Search and Rescue (http://www.bristowsar.com/index.php/recruitment/managed-transition-existing-uk-sar-personnel/)

4thright

1st Apr 2013, 18:51

Baldeep

Your commentary IMO remains firmly OTT on this matter.

Yes Bristow are recruiting. Good. They will have hundreds of CVs for all types of aircrew and engineers to sift through in the next few months before a suitable and complete list of candidates are listed and interviewed.

More specifically, the transition period is over 4 years as of now. People need to read the open government docs on the DfT website for precise base transition dates. This will be driving Bristow's recruiting timetable.

It may be quite likely they want to interview and draw up as full a list as possible very quickly. I would want to do that. They need to reassure themselves and the DfT that they have a good handle on who is going to fill which course and which base over these coming years. This will remain incomplete however, especially as the time period alone may lead to early commitals being withdrawn for all sorts of reasons.

So to me this means there will always be slots next year and beyond. The MoD peeps, in whatever numbers Bristow think they need will fit into that plan, with some no doubt not expetced to leave HM Forces for some years yet, despite the need for Type ratings and non SAR commercial work up experience. Part of Bristow's plans probably includes some time (depending on that experience) on the North Sea etc to get relevent hours and type experience before SAR duties. Nothing wrong with that especially for those with no civvy licensed operations behind them. Bristow will not be recruitng and employing everyone this year whatever role they wish to use them in. They will be certainly looking for well qualified training staff, thats for sure if their transition plan is to get sorted early. Even in the circumstance they had 100% of the needed SAR experienced staff on other Bristow duties at present, they are not going to stack up their replacements on the salary book up to 4 years too early! Calm Down everyone.

As I understand it, the road shows will reveal all to those who want to listen. By all means put your CV in now if you wish, but if you;re MoD then expect it to be sifted for suitability, and subject to interview, be prepared to be offered a job of some sort with Bristow at a forecast date sometime in the next 4 years. :ugh::\:ooh:;)

and well done 212 a good sanity link provided there too:)

ShyTorque

1st Apr 2013, 19:05

From past personal experience of a contractor/service provider change at a base I once worked at, I'd be quite surprised if TUPE applies here.

In my case, my company lost the contract to a new provider. The new provider wanted to retain the pilots, but offered less money and less leave, insisting that TUPE did not apply. The customer then agreed to pay extra to "bridge the gap" to retain the existing pilots. However, the new service provider insisted on a clause in the pilots' contracts whereby they could be moved to a new base at no notice, whereupon their Ts and Cs would revert back to "unbridged standard". I smelled a rat and went elsewhere for employment.

A basic question - does the RAF actually have a contract per se, to provide the service in the first place?

SeaKingDriver

1st Apr 2013, 19:06

Gentlemen,

There seems to be a lot of 'fact' floating around, that presumably has been heard from various sources. All of it is interesting to read and has led me to the point where frankly I have no idea if my recently submitted 'managed transition' application will even be seriously looked at. However, for those who are interested, this is what was briefed to me and others regarding mil crossover:

1. Bristow have already decided on a manpower plot and plan to achieve such, and therefore know how many Co's and Captains they want from mil and civ sources. Regarding Captains there is presumably a plan to reach the required hours on type.

2. The managed transition for mil guys is a transfer of sorts. Regardless of current employment/commission terms, if you are selected by the company then a mutually agreed crossover date will be arranged between Bristow and your respective career manager, at which point you will swap rank slides overnight. At this point, pensions etc will be dealt with on a case by case basis as the numbers are not going to be excessive for each career manager.

This is all in order to STOP a mass exodus leaving gaps in the current SAR organisation. To me it makes sense for both Bristow and the MOD, as well as the individuals concerned. The fact that Bristow Academy can furnish us with IRs may even mean is is included in the deal (dreaming...?).

Frankly, time will tell, but you have to be in it to win it. Personally, I am not a ladder climber, I just thoroughly enjoy my job, and if I get to do it as a civilian, no one in the crew room will be getting attitude about 'how we did it in the mob'!

Take from this what you will, and hopefully see you on the other side!

SKDriver

[email protected]

1st Apr 2013, 19:39

Sea King Driver - completely with you on this one:ok:

Despite what baldeep says, the transition website is allowing mil guys and gals to make their application now without the need for a kneejerk PVR and for Bristow and the MoD to agree who transfers and when.

As to TUPE - the various websites (including ACAS) highlight that TUPE applies when there is a transfer of services or contract from one employer to another. The MoD is the major service provider of UKSAR and that service is being taken over by Bristow on behalf of the DfT and MCA. Since the transfer of services is effectively from one govt dept to another, who is to say that TUPE doesn't apply?

Hummingfrog

1st Apr 2013, 20:02

Macaco Norte

If you had been type qual'd (& a little younger) you would be Bristow

You have your facts wrong I was TUPEd across to Bristow and "worked" for them for 2 weeks, they offered 332L2 out of Aberdeen as well as voluntary redundancy which for me - being a little older;) was a better option:ok:

The fact is Bristow will want experienced SAR crews for its' new contract - it won't be able to take too many crews from oil and gas because it would leave it short there. Remember there is a requirement for 50? odd new to UK pilot posts with this contract so the RAF/RN SAR crews will all stand a good chance of being employed. I know times change but when I left the RAF I had a chat with a chief pilot in Aberdeen and the next day I was on a Puma course because I had loads of experience flying over the NS.

The only thing you have to get used to going MIL>CIV is that nobody authorises you to go flying, there are no secondary duties, the seniority list plays a large part in where you can chose to be based and management always knows best!

Best of luck

HF

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 20:02

Ok

I shall say no more, but many of you are deluded, or blinded by the RAF line. Last month bristows hired mil pilots with SAR on their cv, and they are interviewing every day.

Note I did not say SAR pilots. SH guys from afgan/ Telic etc, plus ALL RN grey fleet can legitimately put SAR on their CV's. And they do.

And they apply to Bristows.

And they get hired.

Check for yourselves.

gasax

1st Apr 2013, 20:06

TUPE is something of a minefield. Which is why private companies will frequently agree that it applies as a contract changes - doing that simply reduces the issues.

Of course those protected rights are usually lost within the first 18 months by a whole variety of means.

As for it applying in a transfer from the military to private sectors? My first thought is not a chance. The military do not have anything which resembles a contracted service. The hardware and personnel requirements are totally different - so the undertakings (that U in TUPE) are different....

Some of the early test cases revolved around whether equipment used in the undertaking of the contract was handed over - that might cover parts of the bases? Probably not though as a simple change in definition will make things look sufficiently different.

In short if yu are an office cleaner TUPE can protect your wages, if you are in a skilled profession - more skilled legal people will have ruled all of that out.....

212man

1st Apr 2013, 20:19

Baldeep, given your intimate knowledge of all things recruitment related, would it be too difficult to actually use the company's correct name rather than that abomination 'Bristows'? :ugh:

SeaKingDriver

1st Apr 2013, 20:21

Baldeep,

I guess you could say I'm lucky then, in that I'm in no position to apply without a transfer process. My plans involved the standard route of attaining my licenses over time, which I have begun, and then job hunting on the open market.

This opportunity, fictional though it may be, is still a potential big win - so why not give it a go. I am sure everybody here is in a different situation both personally and professionally and will do what is right for them.

My information mentioned in my previous post came from the most reliable source available to me, short of a Bristow recruiter, and therefore, for me, it is what I have to work to.

What I don't understand is why they would organise the 'managed transition' process, including website, roadshows, briefs etc and then jump the gun with recruiting. The avenue they have set up means they will almost definitely be able to pick and choose from a reasonably large list of highly qualified personnel served up on a silver platter, and still have plenty of time to train and qualify them before mil SAR dies. Therefore, why settle for a Puma/Junglie SK mate who, though he may have SAR on his CV (and is obviously extremely qualified and capable in his own particular field - good save!) is not necessarily the right horse for the course?

SKDriver

Fareastdriver

1st Apr 2013, 20:28

TUPE is something of a minefield.

TUPE would define it as one SAR company handing it over to another SAR company in the same location. The RAF and RN are not SAR companies. They are fighting services and the pilots are military officers who could be sent anywhere.

Snarlie

1st Apr 2013, 20:34

I am sure that any talk of TUPE applying to military SAR crews is wishful thinking on the part of some. I always believed that once you accepted the Queen`s shilling you could be deployed anywhere the Service thought fit. The fact that some SAR crews have grown accustomed to the role indicates that, perhaps, they have lost the bigger picture involved in life in a blue suit.

I suspect that talk of a transition will offer the Service an opportunity to get shot of some of its `surplus` pilots ie, those coming up to pension but I doubt very much that the MOD will want to cooperate with a civilian operator to ensure that the new SAR contract gets off to a flying start.

Bristow will look favourably on applicants with specific skills who wish to join provided it fits in with vacancies available and the ability to fill positions from within. Don`t for one minute think that there are any special deals within Bristow!

A dose of reality would appear to be in order for some on this thread.

pohm1

1st Apr 2013, 20:37

I'm sure that most of the SAR guys will able to stay within primary role, GD!;)

P1

Baldeep Inminj

1st Apr 2013, 20:41

212 man. Excellent post. Most erudite. :hmm:

Thomas coupling

1st Apr 2013, 21:20

All of the below are facts:
The road show cometh - April.
Those who apply to Bristows and get offered a slot through the managed transition route will have their PVR tailored to their needs. It will mean their pension will be ringfenced.
Those who circumvent the MT, resign and then get offered a job will not have their pension ringfenced.
New rules coming out regarding ringfenced pensions, in.......wait for it...............June :ugh:

TUPE:

When does TUPE apply?
Service provision change
• When an activity currently done by MOD in-house is outsourced to a contractor.
• When a contract for an activity that is currently performed by one contractor is re-competed and is won by another contractor,
• When an activity is being performed by a contractor, but MOD makes a decision to undertake the activity in-house, (in MOD). Inward TUPE.
• Transfer of a function from one part of the public sector to another, where there is a change of employer, (Eg:transfer between MOD and a NHS Trust).

When does TUPE not have to be considered?
• Transfers of assets only.
• The contract is to provide goods only and does not contain any service element.
• Reorganisation and transfers between central government departments and agencies (i.e. within the Civil Service) as there is no change of employer.

Who decides if TUPE applies?
In outsourcing projects, in line with Government policy, MOD will give a view on the application of TUPE in the contracts information issued to companies competing for the contract. Unless there are exceptional circumstances this will normally be that TUPE should apply. Bidders may agree with the MOD’s view or offer an alternative view that takes account of the way they propose to deliver the services required. As the
contracting authority, MOD may accept a bidder’s proposal that would mean that TUPE did not apply, but there would need to be a robust case to justify that the delivery solution offered better value for money than any other options when all costs had been taken in to account.

All the below are "for discussion":
100/250hrs on type and how and where these hours will be accumulated.
Allocated bases cannot be guaranteed. You cannot elect to work at a designated base.

For 'mil' crews, I would suggest: "Hold fast"....let the MT take the strain...this has been a long long time in the making. Bristow cannot afford to fail.:suspect:

NRDK

1st Apr 2013, 21:27

Love to see the crab fats shifting sideways at high speed now the ink has dried. The years of slagging off the civilian SAR to now be faced with the prospect of becoming one, has most of us in fits of laughter:}

Reality check complete...:{

1. Get your licence sorted.
2. Get your CV in to 'BRISTOW' helicopters.
3. Impress the selection team with your ability to play nicely.
4. Wait your turn for Command if you have to.
5. Mil to Civ TUPE doesn't apply....sorry crab, no private schooling, golden pension etc, etc.
6. Sumburgh & Stornoway will grow on you, most of the current team did time there too:ok:

queueaitcheye

1st Apr 2013, 21:42

TC

From a little further down the document:

Does TUPE apply to members of HM Forces working in the undertaking?

No, it does not apply to regular members of HM Forces or to reservists serving full time with regulars for a predetermined period in a specific posting. For some contracts, MOD may allocate HM Forces posts to work with a contractor as an integral part of the delivery of the service requirements.

industry insider

1st Apr 2013, 21:43

Those who apply to Bristows rather than Bristow might not find they are successful. It has never had an "s" on the end.

SASless

1st Apr 2013, 21:54

management always knows best!

Since when does that differ between the Military and Civilian Life?:uhoh:

dieseldo

1st Apr 2013, 21:57

TUPE Is indeed a minefield. Nobody seems to understand exactly how it works or how it is defined.

How it is applied depends on how desperate the successful contractor is to acquire staff and how many.

As an example when Bristow were awarded the Humberside BP contract they wanted the engineers, but not all so they initially drew a line by saying any engineer with a restricted licence was not required.

They (not CHC) then made redundant those who did not cross the line.
As it happens one guy took redundancy and the others were retained by CHC.

Because TUPE is so Byzantine there is a feeling that accepting it is sometimes easier than trying to argue against. There appears to be a gentlemens agreement between CHC and Bristow to apply it as in the case above and when Bristows lost SAR to CHC. I am sure it will be applied again for the comming exodus fron CHC SAR to Bristow SAR.
However they will only take the numbers they need and can make redundant the excess. Not that there will be any this time.

Interestingly when Bond won the Blackpool contract from CHC I believe TUPE did not get applied. No real difference between the two scenarios.

My own personal view is that if a contract runs it's course and a new contract is drawn up TUPE does not apply.

If contractor X is purchased by contractor Y half way through a contract and the staff are transferred as part of the deal then TUPE does apply.

These observations and they are only observations are based on personal experience.

As an after thought the Bristow-Bristows issue is reminiscent of Rolls Royce. Employees of that fine company only speak of working for Royces
never for Rolls, something to do with the history of the company.

ShyTorque

1st Apr 2013, 22:12

dieseldo,

My own personal view is that if a contract runs it's course and a new contract is drawn up TUPE does not apply.

If contractor X is purchased by contractor Y half way through a contract and the staff are transferred as part of the deal then TUPE does apply.

These observations and they are only observations are based on personal experience.

That ties in with my understanding, too. I just can't see how TUPE can apply in this situation. Different contract, different equipment, different locations, different licensing requirements.

TUPE was designed to preserve existing Ts and Cs for existing staff during contractual ownership changes. The military SAR "contract" is coming to an end.

Helinut

1st Apr 2013, 23:12

TUPE is certainly a minefield. I have been peripherally involved in another arena.

I certainly think that if anyone wanted to argue it, there would be a good chance of rejecting the application of TUPE:

- different contract
- different aircraft
- different bases
- different government department as the prime mover
- completely different set of qualifications required

etc.

jimf671

2nd Apr 2013, 01:07

... Allocated bases cannot be guaranteed. You cannot elect to work at a designated base.

So how does this fit with harvesting existing SAR local knowledge?

snakepit

2nd Apr 2013, 06:41

Easy Jim,
You keep/employ some locally and the new guys have to learn it. It was ever thus as the military get posted every 3 years (except Chivanor)

grumpyhammer

2nd Apr 2013, 08:31

OK. Lots of wishful thinking posts popping up. However, truth is there is a plethora of current civilian SAR pilots available to Bristows together with a load more ex military SAR personnel in different civilian markets. All of these would be more desirable than 'pure' military crew. Sure managed path has been mentioned. Maybe a managed path to junior FO at an undesirable base will be considered whilst they learn the trade. Time will tell.

Brutal

2nd Apr 2013, 08:32

I was wondering for the mil guys, as SAR pilots (RN or RAF) are you instrument rated? (Full) ?
Cheers...

[email protected]

2nd Apr 2013, 09:03

Brutal - RAF SAR pilots are procedural instrument rated, RN SAR aircraft do not have the procedural IF capability - however, none of our our military IRs are recognised by EASA or the CAA despite the almost identical profile of the testing.

So in short, no, we do not have civilian IRs, although some have paid their own way through it following completion of the bridging package last year.

Flounder

2nd Apr 2013, 21:02

Sea King Driver...

I just thoroughly enjoy my job, and if I get to do it as a civilian, no one in the crew room will be getting attitude about 'how we did it in the mob'!

..if that's the case then you may struggle to fit in, civvy crew rooms love a bit of that attitude ;). How else can you debrief the trip? ;)

jimf671

3rd Apr 2013, 11:23

- different contract
- different aircraft
- different bases
- different government department as the prime mover
- completely different set of qualifications required

But exactly the same task in the same places with the same basic talents. This explains the need for Managed Transition and why it must surely be a vital component of any plan for FULL VALUE ON DAY ONE.

queueaitcheye

3rd Apr 2013, 12:00

But it isn't just the military with those basic talents Jim.

onesquaremetre

3rd Apr 2013, 13:37

But it isn't just the military with those basic talents

But who will be the independent arbiter selected by the DfT to make that judgement? Who will form the team that four years down the line are able to say categorically that there has been no loss of capability since privatisation of the service? Are the CAA capable of independently judging whether a wholly privatised SAR service meets the same standards as the services it replaced?

As long as the shifts get covered and the aircraft don't get grounded 225-style, it will appear to the politicians and civil servants that everything's working perfectly.

It's not good enough to simply state that there will be no loss of capability without a yardstick to measure this by and that requires a team of experienced external assessors.

queueaitcheye

3rd Apr 2013, 14:04

I'm merely highlighting that some posters seem fixated with the argument that 'only the mil are good enough'. I've seen both sides of the fence and this just isn't true.

The maintenance of standards is an entirely different issue to who is recruited. I would suggest that the assessment /quality assurance procedures currently applied to CHC, and soon to be employed on GAPSAR, will be sufficient for the individual aircrew at a base level. Or are you suggesting that the current civvy bases are winging it?! Surely we're not headed for the mil aircrew V civvy aircrew argument all over again?! http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/smilies2/eusa_wall.gif

As for the contract in its entirety, that must be done at a higher level than individual assessment of the guys and girls operating.

onesquaremetre

3rd Apr 2013, 14:27

But who are/will be the external assessors and what is their SAR pedigree? We have Ofgem, Ofwat, ofcom etc? Who will form Ofsar? Someone has to be able to report back to the Transport Select Committee that everything's going fine and they'll need to base that on hard evidence that capability hasn't been lost. The public demand it these days.

jimf671

3rd Apr 2013, 14:37

... I've seen both sides of the fence and this just isn't true.

Correct.

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/444007-future-uk-sar-post-sar-h-14.html#post7026647

... that four years down the line are able to say categorically that there has been no loss of capability ...

It can be really easy to tell from the ground, no matter what colour the aircraft and flying suits are. However, it is almost certain that there will be a dip in capability in a part of the service and it has absolutely nothing to do with privatisation. There will be a new type on the scene and only an idiot would think that there will not be a significant period of learning how to get the best from that type. The same thing will happen in Norway when the 330 Skvn are re-equpped and in Sweden when the CG get their AW139s.

The S-92 is sorted and, with the new kit, the only way is up.

Bing

3rd Apr 2013, 14:38

You could ask who's providing the external* audit of Mil SAR?
Or perhaps more pertinantly the current Coast Guard SAR provision?

*And no Flying Standards visits don't count because it's the Mil auditing the Mil, I'm sure you wouldn't be happy about Bristow saying their SAR operation was great because they'd checked it themselves.

queueaitcheye

3rd Apr 2013, 14:40

I thought we were talking about the (lack of) need for a managed transition?!

I see no reason to expect a loss in capability. In fact, it will actually be enhanced by the new aircraft and facilities. The new bases will be stood up with the same standard as the bases very soon to be operating under GAPSAR. The contractor will be responsible for maintaining these standards. Surely that's enough? Or are the mil SAR aircrew suggesting that they, and only they, could be the future guardians of SAR standards?

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 15:11

I don't think anyone is suggesting anything of the sort but checks and balances have to exist in the public domain nowadays - although we don't want to descend into the box-ticking madness that prevents the NHS from doing its job because there are so many govt pressures to achieve maximum waiting times and minimum wasted bed spaces.

One problem with the perceived capability gap is that there has been no visibility, from either side of the fence, of what the other side do or don't do other than anecdotal information passed by those who have seen both sides.

Therefore, it is easy to understand the concern that exists when the majority of UK SAR players (currently mil), who know exactly what we do and how we do it, look across to the existing (not future) civilian providers with different equipment levels (yes, including NVG and 330 radar) and wonder how, with the need to fill another 6 flights with qualified, capable and current SAR crews, it will be achieved without the managed transition.

Spanish Waltzer

3rd Apr 2013, 15:26

I guess the managed transition will happily work for the mil rearcrew because they don't need licences, IRs, glass cockpit time etc etc. they can also provide the much needed continuity and local knowledge that some posters say is essential (although its incredible how if this is so vital, mil crews have been permitted to hold shifts at other locations or be tasked by ARCC outside of their own patch on so many occasions!) :mad:

There is also a shortage of current civ SAR experienced rearcrew in UK to fill the future contract.

I can genuinely see it being a bigger problem for mil pilots. There are plenty of civ pilots operating in N sea and elsewhere who have a SAR background, either civil or mil. Not all of them will want to go back to SAR but some will. There are also the ex mil pilots being taken on right now to gain type experience in the N sea too.

I can see those mil pilots lucky enough to be given the managed transition will end up in co pilot jobs in the less popular locations waiting to fill dead men's shoes for capt slots...

onesquaremetre

3rd Apr 2013, 15:45

Bing

You miss the point. A public service, and a popular and successful one at that, is being replaced by a private one. Directors' bonuses and shareholders' dividends will suddenly become part of SAR and that is something that a lot of hard up taxpayers have difficulty with in this day and age. For these payments to be justified, the new service has to prove to those who will be holding it to account that it has adequately replaced the capability of the previous providers. This can't be done simply with rescue statistics, line checks and KPIs. Experienced operators need to be able to independently evaluate what the front line is capable of and where it is falling short.

QHI

The contractor will be responsible for maintaining these standards. Surely that's enough?

Er, no. Self-policing will just not be acceptable for the taxpayer.

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 15:48

There are also the ex mil pilots being taken on right now to gain type experience in the N sea too.
and what SAR experience do they have? And what SAR experience will they get in the N Sea?

Bing

3rd Apr 2013, 16:05

Bing

You miss the point.

I don't really, I assume that the DfT will have to ensure the contract is being fulfilled as required which will involve some form of audit. My slightly oblique point was that presumably this already happens for the CHC Coast Guard contract, unless they're very trusting, so logically an extension of that system could take place.

The anomaly I was trying to point out was that the current Mil SAR isn't, as far as I know, externally audited which raises the question of how to prove the new system is or isn't meeting the standards of the old one if there isn't a baseline to judge against.

ShyTorque

3rd Apr 2013, 16:15

Some mil SAR pilots are now ex-mil and went to the North Sea and elsewhere some time ago. They might not be currently operating in the SAR role, but the relevant skills and experience, gained earlier in their career don't just disappear. After all, there are pilots out there with more relevant experience than some mil pilots might like to admit.

Some of them might even be current and experienced on the S-92 which would give them a useful head start over present military crews planning to leave the service to join the project. They will have to learn a new aircraft. For some that might come as a bigger hurdle than they have realised.

However unpalatable it might be for some, there will be a learning and settling in period for all, irrespective of their background. Hopefully, counterproductive attitudes / egos can be left well behind! If so, everyone can fit in and do a really good job.

Now, where's that dusty old coasting out and pre-winching checklist..... :E

Ticked all the boxes

3rd Apr 2013, 17:06

So will it be - 'right 1 o'clock easy, easy. Steady' or 'boat axis, forward and right 2,1, steady'?
Do you prefer boat axis or aircraft axis? A small point agreed but which method will/do Bristow use?

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 17:36

Shy - I know one or 2 of the ex-mil SAR types who went a while ago to the N Sea but Spanish was talking about those ex-mil who are being taken on now - to my knowledge they are mostly ex - SH not ex-SAR, hence my comments.

junglie jock

3rd Apr 2013, 17:43

I know of at least a dozen ex mil SAR pilots who have been taken on in the last two months. This is why I was previously asking about banging out early and getting into the company!

NRDK

3rd Apr 2013, 17:50

Crab,
You saying that the RAF can't turn out SH pilots capable of becoming SAR pilots??:D

Would imagine that after a 6-12month work up as a co & SAR commander under training that they will be just great in the role. Great team players and versatile to boot. Open minded individuals that have gone civ already in anticipation of having you as their co-pilot. :ok:

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 17:54

You saying that the RAF can't turn out SH pilots capable of becoming SAR pilots?? No, we have been turning SH pilots into SAR captains for many years - SARTU refresher, then SK OCU then 6 months as LCR then another year as CR then Op Captaincy - about 2 years flash to bang on average;)

I have no problem sitting LHS with less SAR experienced captains in the RHS - it's my job most of the time:ok:

NRDK

3rd Apr 2013, 18:35

Crab,

You see, that is why the MOD is too expensive. 2 years for an experienced pilot to go live?

Civilian world 3 months Type rate and get 50+ hours (that can be SAR role training on a non-operational unit) Depending on the area of operation and having a winter in that area 6-12 months could feasibly see a pilot of sound background ability attain his command.

Come on...you lot even got WW his command in less time and he wasn't 2-3000 hr ex SH pilot.

I'm sure you will be a great trainer, without the RAF BS behind you that you are obliged to follow:ugh: we hope you can turn out our pilots fit for SAR;)

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 19:06

NRDK - it's not that different a time-scale - remember I am talking about starting from a SARTU refresher - 1-2 months and then the SK OCU which normally takes 9 months. It is too long but the system is where it is and poor serviceability doesn't help. Once they hit the front-line, most ex-SH guys and gals will get to captaincy in a year to 15 months.

ISTR WW was 18 months or just under which is about right for an ab-initio (especially a good one).

The problem is that the SH guys on N Sea duties will be getting glass cockpit time but little useful SAR trg - once the Inverness training setup is running it will give all the requisite SAR and NVG training on type but until the contract starts, there will only be 2 bases where they can fly operationally to gain real experience. Who will move out of Stornoway and Sumburgh to make room for new copilots to cut their teeth and where will they go?

Once the contract is up and running, then it is a different ball-game and guys and gals can go straight from the S92/AW189 type conversion to a flight and crack on with on the job training - where, after an appropriate period, they can be selected for captaincy based on a proven track record on SAROPs and regular training.

queueaitcheye

3rd Apr 2013, 19:45

"where, after an appropriate period, they can be selected for captaincy based on a proven track record on SAROPs and regular training"

and a vacant slot!

Al-bert

3rd Apr 2013, 20:01

NRDK You see, that is why the MOD is too expensive. 2 years for an experienced pilot to go live?
NRDK I agree entirely.

CRAB starting from a SARTU refresher - 1-2 months and then the SK OCU which normally takes 9 months.

Nine Months?? When did that happen ffs??
If that's now the case, then added to the Valley Gin Palace, the SARF Commander and his 'whirlpool' of Wing Commanders and 'satisfaction' of Squadron Leaders (collective nouns), I am not at all surprised that Mil SAR has been deemed too expensive; it bloody well is AND there's crap serviceability to boot!

Just for info, I went SAR at Valley in the olden days after two tours SH (a healthy dose of RAFG followed by a distinctly unhealthy dose of SHDNI (or SHNFI). SARTS (as was) had Whirlwinds so I never did the 'long course'. I was on shift as a Wessex captain (D cat) within three weeks, following training officers checks with the Sqn QHI. After eight years I converted to Sea Kings (4 months) and seven months later was off to the Falklands for four months as an Op Capt. Eight years on SK saw me back on Wessex and then when the 3a finally appeared after three years, a week at the sim (no aircraft to fly!) found me back as captain on the first SK shift at Valley.

The actual job, and the capabilities of the crews, has not changed significantly since I handed my watch back. So, what went wrong? :(

llamaman

3rd Apr 2013, 20:28

Al-bert,

I'm afraid your fears are well founded. In my opinion the RAF SAR Force, to some extent, has become a victim of it's own success and a classic case of empire-building. There are those (not all) that would have you believe that the art of SAR flying is so highly skilled and requires so much practice that in recent times the approved training path for anyone crossing over from SH has meant 2+ years to achieve captaincy. The hierarchy then seem surprised that they have manning issues! It's no wander the Royal Navy sometimes are bemused at the RAF's approach and a commercial operator will clearly do things very differently. I hope that those guys who decide to jump ship, and deserve a seat, are welcomed with open arms but I wouldn't count on it.

[email protected]

3rd Apr 2013, 21:00

llamaman - don't confuse the empire-building (of which there has been a great deal) with the continued push to maintain the highest standards of flying in SAR.

There are plenty of us with no career aspirations who pride ourselves in keeping the standard of the front-line SAR crews as high as possible - that doesn't happen by itself nor does it happen by sitting on your laurels saying 'this is the way we have always done it so that is fine'.

I have been fortunate to work with some outstandingly professional individuals from all ranks and specialisations in the RAF SAR Force and, despite the naysayers, our track record in maritime, mountain, inland and urban search and rescue is outstanding.

Who else has a standards organisation that does no-notice Opevals, checks every SAR flt every 18 months, are specifically requested by overseas govts to assess their own SAR capability and monitor both the training organisations and the operational ones?

Doesn't happen by accident and it continues despite the empire building BS.

seniortrooper

3rd Apr 2013, 21:06

Spanish Waltzer - bullseye:(

I think, as the dust settles, it will become obvious that there is a gulf between civvy and the mil approach to doing SAR when it comes to qualifications and standards. We are now seeing tensions rise as the mil come to realise that they can't simply "transition" to Long SAR without going through all the hurdles:
ATPLH
IR
Selection
Type training
On job training
Captain.

For many, this will come as a shock because it involves starting from scratch and no exemptions. The route will be tortuous and the target will continue to move.

Crab: Be warned, Those in the mil who understand what is about to happen - have already jumped ship and become offshore drivers to tick all of the above, ready to transfer across to Bristow when the time comes. The RN is haemorrhaging SAR pilots at an unacceptable rate, but they realise that the MT could be too prolonged.
Many could be sidelined by the time they wait for PVR details and pension rights.
Bristow are recruiting NOW. Have you already missed the boat?

212man

3rd Apr 2013, 21:20

the SARF Commander and his

Mmm, isn't his a her these days?

llamaman

3rd Apr 2013, 21:25

Crab,

I think you missed my point. I'm not questioning the standard of Operating within the RAF SAR Force, just the way it has been implemented and managed in recent years. Those within RAF SAR who have done nothing else are blind to just what a cumbersome beast it has evolved into, to the point where the higher echelons (military and government) considered it no longer viable in it's current format. The crux of my post was that over 2 years for an experienced rotary pilot to convert to SAR and achieve captaincy is endemic of a system that is over-egging itself.

Al-bert

3rd Apr 2013, 21:52

Mmm, isn't his a her these days?

212 - err, probably, but does he/she smoke a pipe ? :ok:

Al-bert

3rd Apr 2013, 22:44

I have been fortunate to work with some outstandingly professional individuals from all ranks and specialisations in the RAF SAR Force and, despite the naysayers, our track record in maritime, mountain, inland and urban search and rescue is outstanding.

Who else has a standards organisation that does no-notice Opevals, checks every SAR flt every 18 months,

Crab, I second all of the first para (quoted), but GSU USED to check every flight twice a year, one formal week and one no-notice opeval.We had nine flights. I say again, what went wrong? (I have my own theory!):ugh:

pasptoo

3rd Apr 2013, 22:56

and what SAR experience do they have? And what SAR experience will they get in the N Sea?

A few AFCs must surely mean they have sufficient experience :\

I'm sure they won't forget how to "do" SAR after being away for 12 months thinking about their future.

jimf671

3rd Apr 2013, 23:38

... I assume that the DfT will have to ensure the contract is being fulfilled as required which will involve some form of audit. ...

I want to be a fly on the wall when somebody is explaining this to the senior management of the Coastguard.

Lioncopter

4th Apr 2013, 04:54

Jim the coastguard units currently undergo audits from 3 different organisations excluding the checks that the winchmen have for the Paramedic qualification.

Cabe LeCutter

4th Apr 2013, 06:29

Al-Bert
What happened was that the SeaKing got old and knackered. I converted from 20 years of Wessex SAR through a SeaKing OCU that took 9 months primarily because the front line took all the servicable helicopters and left the OCU with the bent ones.

The STANEVAL (GSU) went to 10 day visits because they were all on the SeaKing and had twice as many pilots to check; allied with all the other visits to CFS, SARTU, Cyprus and even if lucky to somewhere more exotic. The rest of the time was spent with the inevitable paperwork and being controlled by the SAR Force instead of Group.:bored::bored:

[email protected]

4th Apr 2013, 09:48

Bristow are recruiting NOW. Have you already missed the boat? what don't you understand about the managed transition? Mil apply now, get interviewed and accepted or declined then a mutually acceptable timeframe is agreed so that type conversion, IR and time on type can be completed ready for the handover of flights.

We are all aware that we need to jump through hoops to get to where we want to be and no-one is expecting an easy ride. The fact is that those coming from the mil SAR Force will bring current expertise from SAROPs the length and breadth of the country - many here don't seem to realise that and still think that operational sharpness is something that doesn't need practice to maintain.

I think, as the dust settles, it will become obvious that there is a gulf between civvy and the mil approach to doing SAR when it comes to qualifications and standards why should there be a gulf? Surely the aim is to distill the best practices of both sides to provide the best SAR service possible with the latest technology. Or are you another 'Oh yes I did a SAR tour in the 80's and it was easy then, nothing has changed'?

Since the financiers and insurers will want risks minimised and mitigated as far as possible - just cuffing it with some mates who know how to spell SAR really isn't an option.