Where is the Cobham/AMSA SAR Challenger 604???
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In my cave
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DoC,
Thanks for the laugh but I'm sure AMSA and anyone needing their services won't be laughing.
Heads need to roll over this fiasco; as a tax payer, I'm not getting my money's worth out of Cobham's provision of services.
Thanks for the laugh but I'm sure AMSA and anyone needing their services won't be laughing.
Heads need to roll over this fiasco; as a tax payer, I'm not getting my money's worth out of Cobham's provision of services.
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know a bloke who recently left AMSA and apparently the search and rescue service is now run by people responsible for pollution accidents. As a pilot I really hope that's not true........
But it might explain some things......
But it might explain some things......
as a tax payer, I'm not getting my money's worth out of Cobham's provision of services.
I'd think just once and you'd have your money's worth!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: In my cave
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car Ramrod,
I’ve never been rescued, yet. However, that’s really not the point in this case.
Cobham were supposed to start providing a service that has the capacity to find, if humanly possible, and air drop supplies to people in need of support.
Now, if you’re happy to pay for a service, either as a taxpayer or an individual, without the capacity for the service provider (i.e. Cobham in this case) to deliver that service, then that’s up to you.
Me, I’m not happy to pay for something that neither I, nor any other taxpayer, can use if required. That’s just being played for a mug, IMO.
Hopefully, I’ll never have to use the service that Cobham, or any other possible future Search and Rescue contractor, has been tasked to provide to AMSA, on behalf of the Australian taxpayers, but it would be nice to know it was available if I needed to be rescued.
I’ve never been rescued, yet. However, that’s really not the point in this case.
Cobham were supposed to start providing a service that has the capacity to find, if humanly possible, and air drop supplies to people in need of support.
Now, if you’re happy to pay for a service, either as a taxpayer or an individual, without the capacity for the service provider (i.e. Cobham in this case) to deliver that service, then that’s up to you.
Me, I’m not happy to pay for something that neither I, nor any other taxpayer, can use if required. That’s just being played for a mug, IMO.
Hopefully, I’ll never have to use the service that Cobham, or any other possible future Search and Rescue contractor, has been tasked to provide to AMSA, on behalf of the Australian taxpayers, but it would be nice to know it was available if I needed to be rescued.
Last edited by CaptCaveman; 20th Feb 2017 at 10:59.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://youtu.be/UrSHr_qOk4Y
This is how it was done. A proud company and team, finished very strong and with dignity.
Awesome
This is how it was done. A proud company and team, finished very strong and with dignity.
Awesome
Well done to the Dornier crews - from my perspective as Approach controller - always professional and a pleasure to deal with. I especially liked the 50KT TAS increase when asked for max
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh that's easy Car, those with an axe to grind can't use a successful sortie as fuel for their witch hunt
I do find it funny all the hate directed to Cobham. Has anyone just stood back and thought that Pearl's refusal to table tender that used jets over turbo props as required in the contact is a pretty significant factor in them losing the contract in the first place?
A new type is always going to have teething problems, give it 12 months and I'd put money on the new SAR service will be much more efficient and effective than the old one.
Certainly not taking anything away from the old Dornier crews or the Pearl service who did a fantastic job, but a new company and new equipment will give a broader capability
I do find it funny all the hate directed to Cobham. Has anyone just stood back and thought that Pearl's refusal to table tender that used jets over turbo props as required in the contact is a pretty significant factor in them losing the contract in the first place?
A new type is always going to have teething problems, give it 12 months and I'd put money on the new SAR service will be much more efficient and effective than the old one.
Certainly not taking anything away from the old Dornier crews or the Pearl service who did a fantastic job, but a new company and new equipment will give a broader capability
You'd expect there to be a few issue with a new provider. But considering how good a job Cobham has done with the Surveillance Australia gig I reckon its a safe bet that they'll nail the SAR one as well.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh thats right its still delayed, coming up to 3 months now.
I rest my case!!
Can the 604 drop liferafts? I've just read an interview with the sailors saying that their boat was capsized and damaged and I'm curious why they only got dropped some radio gear.
The news report I read said the stuff was dropped but not retrievable, which wouldn't fall into the 'successful' category.
What's the truth?
What's the truth?
I said successful drop. Not successful retrieve. Different things.
Unless the previous provider only dropped when it was guaranteed they'd be received 100% of the time, then I bet they "failed" at drops too! Under your criteria.
I have no connexion to any of the previous operators, and reading this thread I have no side in any fight.
I would say as a person bobbing about in a sinking boat that if I cannot reach the dropped stores, then the drop is not not successful.
I would say as a person bobbing about in a sinking boat that if I cannot reach the dropped stores, then the drop is not not successful.
No connection here either comp stall.
Considering there's been a bunch of people saying the jet wont be good enough at dropping, and that they've gotten stuck in for items hitting the aircraft on the way out etc during training/certification, they seem pretty quiet about the aspect of a successful drop when it happens on a real mission.
And unless you physically drop the item on the person, I would not count retrieval as a factor. A persons inability to recover an item, no matter who/what dropped it, isn't part of the actual drop act itself. That's what I'm getting at.
Considering there's been a bunch of people saying the jet wont be good enough at dropping, and that they've gotten stuck in for items hitting the aircraft on the way out etc during training/certification, they seem pretty quiet about the aspect of a successful drop when it happens on a real mission.
And unless you physically drop the item on the person, I would not count retrieval as a factor. A persons inability to recover an item, no matter who/what dropped it, isn't part of the actual drop act itself. That's what I'm getting at.
Topdrop, you know there's a difference between your silly example and close enough where it can be retrieved.
You could drop something within 5 metres of a boat, but even that close won't guarantee retrieval depending on sea state and the rescuee's ability to grab it.
You could drop something within 5 metres of a boat, but even that close won't guarantee retrieval depending on sea state and the rescuee's ability to grab it.
There's much more to dropping than proximity... something 10m away but downwind is potentially useless. 100m away but upwind and will be blown to the people in need is much more useful.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been in the industry as a professional a drop can go by the book (i.e. everything functions IAW the script), if however that drop by the book isn't retrieved, or the poor helpless people in distress are not able to retrieve the item then it is deemed unsuccessful. It all comes down to the person flying (Capt) and his timing, weather has to always be factored into a drop by the crew at that moment in time.
I cant recall an actual drop in ideal conditions. If you want to see how a drop is performed in less than desireable conditions check this one out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJB6NXVu1xY
Practice does make perfect and that is why the old operator conducted loads of land and marine drops for practice, I believe the new operator will be doing this training in the Sim (correct me if I am wrong someone).