UK Fixed Wing SAR

[Lima Juliet]

I see these chaps are in action around the English Channel today looking for a trawler crew...

http://www.ci-airsearch.com/

http://www.ci-airsearch.com/images/lionspride3.jpg

What stunned me is that they claim to run it for £90k per year by using volunteer aircrew like the RNLI. Why couldn't this work for the whole of the UK? When allied to the new helicopter SAR program, this could give us what we need.

I've long been dubious on the military's role in peacetime SAR. Since 2004, the Civil Continguencies Act (CCA2004) has required the Home Office (not MOD) to provide emergency response. Now could be the time to make this happen. Our MOD on-station fire and medical emergency response has been cut back due to CCA2004 and the Civil Emergency Services (CES) turn out and take over - they have primacy. If I fall off my motorbike at work I don't rely upon the MOD to supply emergency response to scrape me up and cart me to hospital - so if I jump out of my Tornado why shouldn't the CES come and get me? (and they will when the Bristow contract kicks in).

So, how about it, manning up an Islander as a volunteer with some civvy aircrew mates in the same way as the RNLI? I'd be up for it if I lived within 30 minutes - and they don't all need to be based by the sea as the UK is pretty small.

LJ

[Always Up]

Interesting proposition I guess the only reason with SAR being traditionally supplied by the MOD is that historically they have been the only organisation with the resources. Of course the services had a vested interest to ensure that those in peril were rescued as soon as possible - apart from the desire to get you back to work its an implicit part of the contract that you will be backed up.
Now of course teh world has changed and cost is king now - all else falls to arguments of costs. I can see teh new rotary SAR service working but I must admit I would have my doubts on the viability of a voluntary service as you described Leon - just would not get the crews (air or ground) to man it I believe. Not sure I would want to rely on it either.

[Ubehagligpolitiker]

The history of organised SAR goes back to WWII- the military did it then to rescue military folk, in fact it was started to rescue aircrew to try maintain front line strength.

After the war it evolved with the RAF and RN providing resources for military rescue and the coastguard responsible for civil operations but able to use military resources, including fixed wing. The fixed wing SAR was provided by MPA.

Clearly, the RAF no longer has dedicated fixed wing SAR. I cannot see any reason why a civilian operator shouldn't provide SAR be it rotary or fixed wing provided they can meet the operational task and attain the excellent standard that RAF and RN crews have provided for more than 70 years. We'll have to see how the civvies get on but the bar is set very high.

However, when it comes to fixed wing we need to look at the UK Search and Rescue Region (area of responsibility) which stretches as far west as 30W - it is enormous and even the RAF with Nimrod MPA, occasionally AAR supported, struggled on occasions to meet the necessary response. An Islander is not going to cut it and I believe that the tasks that it can perform would be as easily done by a helicopter.

The bottom line is that following the decision to scrap Nimrod UK is in breach of its international SAR responsibilities and it is only a question of time until we are caught out. Compensation for negligence through a civilian court, say in the USA, could be eye watering.

[Always Up]

The bottom line is that following the decision to scrap Nimrod UK is in breach of its international SAR responsibilities and it is only a question of time until we are caught out. Compensation for negligence through a civilian court, say in the USA, could be eye watering.

Did not know that countries had internationally legal responsibilities to provide a SAR capability nor that you could sue if you did not get rescued! Good grief.:eek:

[RUCAWO]

must admit I would have my doubts on the viability of a voluntary service as you described Leon - just would not get the crews (air or ground) to man it I believe. Not sure I would want to rely on it either.

Just like you can't rely on these guys :rolleyes:

Donaghadee Lifeboat - Callout Information for the Donaghadee RNLI Lifeboat (http://www.donaghadeelifeboat.co.uk/callouts.html)

[Melchett01]

The bottom line is that following the decision to scrap Nimrod UK is in breach of its international SAR responsibilities and it is only a question of time until we are caught out. Compensation for negligence through a civilian court, say in the USA, could be eye watering.

But wasn't SAR only a 'secondary duty' for the Nimrod, with its primary role being to sub hunting in support of the nuclear deterrent? Never had anything to do with the Kipper Fleet, so could well be wrong. But if I'm not, I don't see how we could be held liable for not carrying out a function that wasn't actually the primary role of a platform.

[500N]

"Did not know that countries had internationally legal responsibilities to provide a SAR capability"

Always Up

Coming from Perth, that surprises me considering the couple of very
well publicized rescues have been mounted from there (by the RAN)
as well as other rescues of round the world yachtsmen and women.

[Lima Juliet]

UK Search and Rescue

It is stated in a 2008 report by the Maritime and Coastal Agency ("Search and Rescue Framework for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland") that:

"The UK organisation for civil maritime and civil aviation search and rescue is derived from the UK Government's adherence to the Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Convention on Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) (1974), the Maritime Search and Rescue Convention (1979) and the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago 1944) (Annex 12)."

The Maritime Search and Rescue Convention (1979) allowed the definition of Search and Rescue regions for each country which was a party to the agreement. It states:

"Each search and rescue region shall be established by agreement among Parties concerned. The Secretary-General shall be notified of such agreement."

and

"On receiving information that a person is in distress at sea in an area within which a Party provides for the overall co-ordination of search and rescue operations, the responsible authorities of that Party shall take urgent steps to provide the most appropriate assistance available."

The Search and Rescue Region for which the UK is responsible for "overall co-ordination of search and rescue operations" is shown in the following picture...

http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mcga07-home/emergencyresponse/mcga-searchandrescue/uksrr_irl-4.jpg

...The UK Search and Rescue region covers some 1.25 million square nautical miles of sea and over 10.5 thousand nautical miles of coastline. Nowhere does any of the above references say you have to conduct SAR from the air. Have a look at the following that shows the rest of the world and who was designated lead coordinators for each area from the 1979 SAR Convention:

http://www.arctis-search.com/dl92&display&x=500&y=397

I doubt that all of the nations have full airborne SAR capabilities for all of the agreed SAR regions!!! Indeed, we already hand-off SAR to the Irish, Icelanders, French, Dutch, Danish, Swedish and Norwegians within our agreed SAR region.

Anyway, back to my point, if the Channel Islands can do this, and we are falling short within mainland UK, then why can't we do this in a similar manner to the RNLI?

LJ

[Lima Juliet]

Here is an extract from their website:

Funding

The Service does not make a charge for performing searches or responding to calls for standby. The funds required to equip and run the aircraft are raised almost exclusively within the Channel Islands, and come from a wide variety of sources, including collecting boxes, social events and donations, flag days bequests and even contributions for the scattering of ashes from the air. In each of the four major Channel Islands, there is a supporters' organisation, "The Friends of Air Search", who are instrumental in raising the majority of the required funds. A number of Channel Island companies and institutions agree to sponsor individual searches; some Governmental assistance has also been provided.

The cost of purchasing and equipping the Service's Islander aircraft (which carries the same name as its forebear, "Lions' Pride", in recognition of the fund-raising activities of the Lions Clubs of Jersey and Guernsey) was some £300,000. The cost of providing the hangar was £150,000. The annual running costs vary from year to year, but are budgeted (exclusive of capital costs) at £90,000. The purchase and installation of an advanced third generation Forward Looking Infra Red camera (FLIR) which is located beneath the nose. FLIR and other modifications in 2000, cost £190,000.

A very big BZ ("Well Done") to those that set this up and keep it running :D:D:D

[Always Up]

"Did not know that countries had internationally legal responsibilities to provide a SAR capability"

Always Up

Coming from Perth, that surprises me considering the couple of very
well publicized rescues have been mounted from there (by the RAN)
as well as other rescues of round the world yachtsmen and women.

Err like I said was not aware of international legal framework. Nor was I aware that place of residence conferred any special or particular knowledge on the matter - must have missed that in the residency test. You are a bit of an arse 500N ain't you:ugh:

Leon - thanks for your subsequent post you explained it very well.

[Always Up]

Just like you can't rely on these guys :rolleyes:

Donaghadee Lifeboat - Callout Information for the Donaghadee RNLI Lifeboat (http://www.donaghadeelifeboat.co.uk/callouts.html)

Yup that's exactly the same thing:rolleyes:

[CoffmanStarter]

Hi LJ ... Great idea :ok:

Mind you it looks like Customs & Excise had the same idea :E

http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1382222F.jpg

I know ... hat, coat, umbrella ... door

Best ...

Coff.

[Lima Juliet]

Coff

You may not be so 'tongue in cheek' as you think. The US use single engine aircraft under their Civil Air Patrol (CAP) scheme Civil Air Patrol - United States Air Force Auxiliary (http://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/index.cfm). I think your microlight might be a bit limited (no IMC or night capability) but a light twin aircraft like the Diamond DA42 with an EO/IR capability would do the job and can fly for a very long time (8hours+).

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/DiamondDA42MPP.jpg

LJ :ok:

[Lima Juliet]

In fact there's one at Gamston for sale for £270k - anyone feeling generous? http://www.diamondair.co.uk/used-aircraft/uploads/G-CTCG_v3.pdf

[Trim Stab]

Well you can actually do a lot better than that!

Diamond are now producing a maritime search DA42M with maritime radar, AIS and bore-sighted EO/IR camera. List of sensors here:
Diamond Airborne Sensing: Sensor Portfolio (http://www.diamond-sensing.com/index.php?id=sensorportfolio0&L=1)

And (in extremis) it can fly longer than 8 hours - the standard aircraft has flown 13 hours in surveillance mode with pilot with very large bladder.

[Cows getting bigger]

I'm a huge Twinstar fan and have had the pleasure of flying it in many environments. However, I'm not sure I would be keen to be heading West of 10 West in the middle of winter with only 30l of TKS fluid between me and a watery grave. One presumes a beefed-up anti icing option is available?

[Trim Stab]

One presumes a beefed-up anti icing option is available?

AFAIK, no. However, a small amount of TKS does last a long time on the lifting surfaces and props. The canopy de-ice is the guzzler.

[alfred_the_great]

Genuine question - at what point does a 'goonbag' become compulsory? Obviously I've seen forces aircraft operate over water without them (mainly Nimrod crews' publicity pictures or Prince William flying his SAR cab), but is there a percentage of flight over water that mandates their use? Or is it an aircraft captain/authoriser decision?

[CoffmanStarter]

LJ ... Just a bit of a leg pull old chap :ok:

Mind you during the mid 70's, when I were a lad, I was lucky enough to do a few weekend RH Seat trips in a Partenavia out of Lydd as an unofficial U/T "plotter" (unpaid) for the Coast Guard English Channel Traffic charter while doing my PPL ... This was before G-HMCG (Islander) took up the work ... in the beginning a Royal Navy Devon covered the Channel during the working week out of RAF Manston with the Partenavia then the Islander out of Lydd at the weekends ... until the Islander took over full time.

Great fun as everything was legal low level to ID naughty ships not complying with Channel Lane procedure.

http://www.greatlakesair.net/images/partenavia.jpg

Cheap to operate ... single pilot operation ... reasonably good handling at low level.

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/uk/cg/pics/G-HMCG.jpg

Unfortunately I never managed to wangle a ride in either the Devon or Islander :{

Best ...

Coff.

[lj101]

From memory

15 degrees and below for RN and 10 degrees and below for RAF. I've seen Sqn bosses give his crews the choice for AAR trails. Most wear them.

[RUCAWO]

Yup that's exactly the same thing:rolleyes:

No ,going out in the dark in a force 9 or 10 in a 57 ft boat is a lot more dangerous.

[alfred_the_great]

Lj - and stuff like chinnok flights from ships? Never been in a carrier with them embarked, so can't really comment.

[Always Up]

No ,going out in the dark in a force 9 or 10 in a 57 ft boat is a lot more dangerous.

well there you go, as we say in Aus "boats are dangerous so dont go in them
sweetheart":ugh: