sea king at cumberland infirmary today

[mopardave]

whilst visiting my daughter......a junior doctor at Cumberland infirmary, I watched a sea king come in twice to off load some casualties. I was able to get up close enough to watch the crews slick professionalism. It just made me think, how can the replacement privatised service ever be as good as highly trained military crews? It saddens me that this government is hell bent on destroying yet another service we can be proud of. They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!:ugh:
MD

[snaggletooth]

Some of those same military crews will be transferring to the new service and will endeavour to ensure it keeps to the same high standards the public have enjoyed thus far. Lets not forget that our civilian counterparts have been maintaining SAR standby in exactly the same way as their military brethren for many years. Joe Public wont notice any difference in the service they receive. Right Crab?

[Stuff]

snaggletooth, I couldn't agree more. Those that transfer across will still provide the same outstanding service we all hope to never need.

The privatised service will only start to show it's true colours when it tries to recruit, train and retain personnel operating to the same standards as those professionals it acquired at contract start.

[mopardave]

That's what I thought gents......the new privatised providers will benefit from the "system" that produced and engendered such expertise and professionalism......but a few years down the line when all the ex RAF and RN guys have retired/moved on????? I can't help being suspicious of the process of outsourcing "services" that should be maintained by the military. We just don't know when to stop "tinkering"!:{

[snaggletooth]

True, there is much to be said for the military OASC/Officer/NCA selection process and training route. I am a product of it and think it produces a robust and reliable product. How the new provider will do it in the furure remains to be seen, but, sure as eggs are eggs, an effective system will be put in place. And at the end of the day people will still get rescued.

[AGS Man]

Slightly off thread but if you read the report on the RAFAT Ejection seat tragedy it highlights the fact that all Hawk maintainers are civillians now except for the RAFAT and there is no service training courses for the RAFAT ground crew. Just another example of succesive Governments erosion of our Forces.

[mopardave]

Slightly off thread but if you read the report on the RAFAT Ejection seat tragedy it highlights the fact that all Hawk maintainers are civillians now except for the RAFAT and there is no service training courses for the RAFAT ground crew. Just another example of succesive Governments erosion of our Forces.

not off thread AGS Man........I suppose what I'm driving at is the worrying (in my humble opinion) dilution of service personnel.......no disrespect to those in the private sector, who I'm sure do a great job.........but surely, there can be no substitute for disciplined, dedicated and motivated military personnel. I feel sure this trend will come back and bite us on the a*se in the future. Out of interest, does anyone know how many trades existed in the RAF, say 30 years ago.......and how many there are now?
MD

[Thud_and_Blunder]

I see things from a slightly different perspective. I was in the UK military for 28 years, 26 of them as aircrew. On leaving I obtained a job in civvy street, still flying. Thanks (not) to the rules on flying public transport after the age of 60, I have had to move sideways into the training department and spend my working day teaching in aircraft and simulators.

The youngsters I have the privilege to instruct are every bit as capable, dedicated and professional as any I ever worked with in the military. Their standards are at least as high as those required in RN, AAC or RAF service, and I cannot fault their self-discipline. There will be exceptions, I'm sure - just as there are ex-military aircrew who should never have passed selection let alone flying training. The 'system' you mourn produced good and (occasionally) indifferent-to-bad, there won't be any change as we start to see more self-funded self-improvers move up the career structure. I have a very high degree of confidence in the aircrew of the future.

As for there being 'no substitute' for ex-military personnel, you might be surprised (and slightly disappointed) at how some of them/us, with a huge feeling of 'entitlement', struggle to cope with the demands of civil aviation.

[mopardave]

I see things from a slightly different perspective. I was in the UK military for 28 years, 26 of them as aircrew. On leaving I obtained a job in civvy street, still flying. Thanks (not) to the rules on flying public transport after the age of 60, I have had to move sideways into the training department and spend my working day teaching in aircraft and simulators.

The youngsters I have the privilege to instruct are every bit as capable, dedicated and professional as any I ever worked with in the military. Their standards are at least as high as those required in RN, AAC or RAF service, and I cannot fault their self-discipline. There will be exceptions, I'm sure - just as there are ex-military aircrew who should never have passed selection let alone flying training. The 'system' you mourn produced good and (occasionally) indifferent-to-bad, there won't be any change as we start to see more self-funded self-improvers move up the career structure. I have a very high degree of confidence in the aircrew of the future.

As for there being 'no substitute' for ex-military personnel, you might be surprised (and slightly disappointed) at how some of them/us, with a huge feeling of 'entitlement', struggle to cope with the demands of civil aviation.

Thud_and_Blunder is offline Report Post


Thanks for that T and B........you certainly gave me something to think about there. It happens in all occupations......you wonder how some people make it........I just tend to assume that a training regime as rigorous as that of the RAF, or AAC or RN for that matter, would screen out those whose performance is questionable.
MD

[radar101]

Mopardave: " I just tend to assume that a training regime as rigorous as that of the RAF, or AAC or RN for that matter, would screen out those whose performance is questionable."


So you never came across tossers/lazy bu88ers in your RAF service? I cannot say the same.

[nimbev]

The South Coast, ie the UK area with the greatest density of shipping, both commercial and private, is already covered by MCGA helicopters operating out of Portland and Lee on Solent. I have never heard anyone criticising either their commitment or ability.
Likewise has anyone seriously suggested that the RNLI are not up to scratch because they are not servicemen - by the same arguement perhaps we should give the RNLI to the RN. I don't think so.:=

[mopardave]

Likewise has anyone seriously suggested that the RNLI are not up to scratch because they are not servicemen - by the same arguement perhaps we should give the RNLI to the RN. I don't think so.

nimbev is online now Report Post


No, I'm not suggesting that at all........the RNLI are as far as I'm aware, volunteers.......and they risk their lives for no financial reward.......and god bless 'em for that! I just have a feeling that where profit making organisations get involved, they have to consider the "bottom line"......I'm not criticising anyone Nimbev........I suspect a considerable number of non military SAR crews were once upon a time in the military? I say again, not having a go at anyone........just putting it out there.
MD

[ShotOne]

Having had the pleasure of working with them, I'm with you 100% mopar on the slick professionalism of mil SAR crews. But if one looks around the world, civil SAR is very much the norm and let's not do down their equally slick professionalism.

[mopardave]

Having had the pleasure of working with them, I'm with you 100% mopar on the slick professionalism of mil SAR crews. But if one looks around the world, civil SAR is very much the norm and let's not do down their equally slick professionalism.

Not doing anyone down ShotOne.........I just have a huge pride in, and respect for our armed forces......the RAF in particular. :ok:

[nimbev]

Mopardave Not suggesting that you were being critical - sorry if my post read that way. :O

[mopardave]

no sweat nimbev.........non taken.
:ok

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

a few years down the line when all the ex RAF and RN guys have retired/moved on?????


This won't happen for more than a few years - almost all of the mil SAR people who Bristow have recruited are in the 30-45 age band so Bristow will probably get many years out of them.

[Kluseau]

There are areas of Scotland where if your boat runs aground or you fall off a mountain you take pot luck on whether the rescue helicopter that arrives to assist is yellow from Lossiemouth, grey and orange from Prestwick, or red and white from Sumburgh or Stornoway. I've never seen any hint in the media of anyone being more, or less, grateful depending on the colour of the helicopter or the employer of the crew: nor ever heard a hint of any differences in performance or commitment of those involved. Though five or ten years down the road when funding has been cut a few times... There's a salutary lesson in the saga of the Coastguard emergency tugs: BBC News - UK's last coastguard tug 'saved' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-17457235)

It always used to be said that the primary purpose of SAR helicopters was to rescue downed aircrew, and that anything else they did was (a) secondary and (b) valuable for training. This was the MoD argument that helped counter a daft government idea to charge for SAR services in the early 1980s, which ran into the ground for a number of reasons, mainly because common sense was still not totally dead (and because a main provider of rescue services, the RNLI, was funded charitably, and there was every chance the proposals would undermine that and end up costing the government more).

But when the entire UK SAR helicopter fleet is red and white, presumably the primary aim will no longer be to do with with the (very much smaller number of generally rather safer) military aircraft in our skies?

[Biggus]

Kluseau,

First of all you won't take pot luck in what turns up, someone will have decided on the best asset to meet your particular situation, which isn't always the closest.

Secondly, just because you haven't heard of any differences in performance, it doesn't mean that there aren't any! Ask a civillian MRT in NW Scotland who they would rather work with.

As one particular example, I think hover taxying up the side of a hill in blowing snow to effect a rescue will be a thing of the past.

The difference isn't about the commitment of the helo crews, it's about the rules they have to work to...





No doubt someone with more experience will be along shortly to shoot me down in flames (not that they will know what my personal experience is of course).