The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I recall the 139 was not the weapon of choice of the SMEs but the politically and commercially preferred option.
As even a 4-Star will tell you - and did last week - you can make all the recommendations you like, backed up with appropriate evidence to support your case, but when the politicians have significantly different agendas they choose what they want.
Plenty about AW139, but this, though it wouldn't be my choice for big oceans and big mountains, seems to be a reasonably-sized aircraft in relation to Lot 2 requirements.
- Is there anything really wrong with AW139?
- Is it Lot 2 (and its predecessors) that has the errors rather than the aircraft?
- Is criticism of the AW139 connected, rightly or wrongly, with the ORNGE farce?
- Is there anything really wrong with AW139?
- Is it Lot 2 (and its predecessors) that has the errors rather than the aircraft?
- Is criticism of the AW139 connected, rightly or wrongly, with the ORNGE farce?
Anyone heard anything about the transition-out plan for the MoD SAR bases? The thoughts are meant to have been thought and the meetings are meant to have met but I suspect it's all gone political. NIMBY time.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And where did that come from TC?
- everything about UKSAR seems a tad dodgy at the moment... But all will be well in the end I'm sure!
As for transition plans...MoD or otherwise... Who is going to know anything about that? Perhaps in a year or so, when a contract has been signed, the winning bidder will be able to reveal all about their transition plans. As you know, MoD plans to retire all SAR SKs by Apr 2016.... Well that's what the SDSR said anyway... So it's bound to be true!
- everything about UKSAR seems a tad dodgy at the moment... But all will be well in the end I'm sure!As for transition plans...MoD or otherwise... Who is going to know anything about that? Perhaps in a year or so, when a contract has been signed, the winning bidder will be able to reveal all about their transition plans. As you know, MoD plans to retire all SAR SKs by Apr 2016.... Well that's what the SDSR said anyway... So it's bound to be true!
... As for transition plans...MoD or otherwise... Who is going to know anything about that? Perhaps in a year or so, when a contract has been signed, the winning bidder will be able to reveal all about their transition plans. As you know, MoD plans to retire all SAR SKs by Apr 2016.... Well that's what the SDSR said anyway... So it's bound to be true!
The DfT have been asked if more detail is available. It was expected that by this time the MoD board would have provided an answer. However, no answer was available last week.
While all this is of great interest to flyers and their bosses, on the ground, or on the coastline, or on the launch slip, the foot-soldiers of SAR want to be able to plan for the changing capabilities of the air assets in their area. Certainly within the next few months, and probably over the next couple of years, I expect that a few events will take place to disseminate information and build the necessary new relationships. Hopefully, there won't be too much screaming and shouting between now and a group hug.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: 57 Mount Pleasant St
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's hope that DfT have not started how they mean to go on. They still haven't announced the PQQ results yet but companies from around the world are now planning the site visits that start this week!
I believe that the visits were meant to be part of the dialogue phase of the process..after PQQ results.
As it stands there will be people en-route to Lossie that may find out in an email on Friday morning that they may as well have an expensive round of golf instead....OK, so it's not all bad!
I believe that the visits were meant to be part of the dialogue phase of the process..after PQQ results.
As it stands there will be people en-route to Lossie that may find out in an email on Friday morning that they may as well have an expensive round of golf instead....OK, so it's not all bad!
As it stands there will be people en-route to Lossie that may find out in an email on Friday morning that they may as well have an expensive round of golf instead....OK, so it's not all bad!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: 57 Mount Pleasant St
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of going back on thread for which I apologise.
It looks like all potential bidders have passed the PQQ stage, what this means in reality is that DfT didn't manage to assess them properly and as such are hoping for a bit of natural down-selection.
The way to do this is to completely change the time available to react by reducing it, with no notice, from 12 weeks to 4 weeks. This will effectively give those new players no time whatsoever to firm up tentative plans that may have been on hold pending PQQ success. 12 weeks was challenging enough, 4 weeks just plays into the hands of previous SAR bidders.
A sceptic might suggest that this automatically reduces the field to 3, FBH, CHC and maybe Bond if they can secure the right partners, and this may be the aim of the "authority". I'm a sceptic.
It looks like all potential bidders have passed the PQQ stage, what this means in reality is that DfT didn't manage to assess them properly and as such are hoping for a bit of natural down-selection.
The way to do this is to completely change the time available to react by reducing it, with no notice, from 12 weeks to 4 weeks. This will effectively give those new players no time whatsoever to firm up tentative plans that may have been on hold pending PQQ success. 12 weeks was challenging enough, 4 weeks just plays into the hands of previous SAR bidders.
A sceptic might suggest that this automatically reduces the field to 3, FBH, CHC and maybe Bond if they can secure the right partners, and this may be the aim of the "authority". I'm a sceptic.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am thinking you are so right Ron, especially if all the PQQ bidders got through. What on earth are the DfT thinking? Mind you, it's also debatable if all 3 of the companies you mention may have done any work either, given it costs money and they will be as reluctant as any other not to spend cash too soon.
I am sensing a stitch up... Big time!
I am sensing a stitch up... Big time!
So are we set for another fiasco which falls flat on its face at the last moment?
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: On shift
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LinkedIn Helicrew Job Forum
Has anyone seen the Helicrew Job Forum on LinkedIn? Developing Assets (UK) Ltd are currently advertising for S61, S92 and EC225 pilots on a contractor basis. A little bird tells me there might be a S92 type rating up for grabs paid for by the company which could come in handy in the not too distant future.
Say what you want about life outside the military, this company's not just emerging into the market and currently have 25 operators employed across UK, Ireland and worldwide. Might be worth a punt!?
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=4...k=myg_ugrp_ovr
Say what you want about life outside the military, this company's not just emerging into the market and currently have 25 operators employed across UK, Ireland and worldwide. Might be worth a punt!?
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=4...k=myg_ugrp_ovr
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: EGPB/EGPD
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surprises in rescue service list of bidders
Press and Journal - Article - Surprises in rescue service list of bidders
The list... Bond Offshore, CHC, Bristow, and the Ipod Consortium, made up of ERA Helicopters and British International.
Press and Journal - Article - Surprises in rescue service list of bidders
The list... Bond Offshore, CHC, Bristow, and the Ipod Consortium, made up of ERA Helicopters and British International.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shetlander...having read the article myself, I suggest you go back and read it yourself again, and then consider a serious redrafting of the above post. You are in danger of seriously misleading the devoted readership of this thread.... Well that man who calls him or herself crab, anyway!