UK NPAS discussion: thread Mk 2
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: upyours
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly off thread but.............................................
Banks nearly destroy the financial system.
Government bails banks out with billions of tax payers cash.
Government/country is almost bankrupt.
Government borrows from the banks they bailed out.
Government pays interest to borrow the money they put into the banks bailout.
Somewhat perverted IMHO.
Banks nearly destroy the financial system.
Government bails banks out with billions of tax payers cash.
Government/country is almost bankrupt.
Government borrows from the banks they bailed out.
Government pays interest to borrow the money they put into the banks bailout.
Somewhat perverted IMHO.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I appreciate that the Winsor Review & all the controversy surrounding it is not the main subject of this thread,
but as Police Air Support is one of many Policing functions directly affected by the Winsor proposals,
and therefore affects NPAS, I feel that it is worthy of further discussion here .....
SID - In your quote from the BBC news, you missed off the following paragraph from further down the page :
That last bit ...... ???
It doesn't quite ring true with the information provided on your other post,
obtained from the Home Office, under a Freedom of Information application asking
"…how much Tom Winsor has either been paid or will be paid to carry out his review
on remuneration and conditions of service for police officers and staff in England and Wales?"
The reply to which was :
Has Theresa May got her facts wrong 
?
Is she lying
?
Along with Mr. Herbert who is forcing NPAS through, what else are they NOT telling us ?
What other facts have they got wrong ? What else might they by LYING about ????
It will be interesting to see how the Police Federation handle this one
p.s. At 1'18" in the Dizzy video - is that a Yorkshire NPAS infiltrator ?
but as Police Air Support is one of many Policing functions directly affected by the Winsor proposals,
and therefore affects NPAS, I feel that it is worthy of further discussion here .....
SID - In your quote from the BBC news, you missed off the following paragraph from further down the page :
Vested interest'
The home secretary was asked about his appointment by delegate Sarah Adams at the conference in Bournemouth.
Ms Adams said: "When you appointed Tom Winsor to carry out your independent review of policy,
did you know that the law firm Tom Winsor is part of, which is White and Case,
was negotiating the multi-million groundbreaking deal for G4S with Lincolnshire Police?
"How can it be fair and independent if there's a vested interest?"
Mrs May said: "Tom Winsor did his review entirely independently.
He did not do that review as part of the firm -
he did it as an individual.
The home secretary was asked about his appointment by delegate Sarah Adams at the conference in Bournemouth.
Ms Adams said: "When you appointed Tom Winsor to carry out your independent review of policy,
did you know that the law firm Tom Winsor is part of, which is White and Case,
was negotiating the multi-million groundbreaking deal for G4S with Lincolnshire Police?
"How can it be fair and independent if there's a vested interest?"
Mrs May said: "Tom Winsor did his review entirely independently.
He did not do that review as part of the firm -
he did it as an individual.
It doesn't quite ring true with the information provided on your other post,
obtained from the Home Office, under a Freedom of Information application asking
"…how much Tom Winsor has either been paid or will be paid to carry out his review
on remuneration and conditions of service for police officers and staff in England and Wales?"
The reply to which was :
I am able to disclose the following information:
The law firm White and Case, at which Tom Winsor is a partner,
will receive £300 per day for his services.
The law firm White and Case, at which Tom Winsor is a partner,
will receive £300 per day for his services.
?Is she lying
?Along with Mr. Herbert who is forcing NPAS through, what else are they NOT telling us ?
What other facts have they got wrong ? What else might they by LYING about ????
It will be interesting to see how the Police Federation handle this one
p.s. At 1'18" in the Dizzy video - is that a Yorkshire NPAS infiltrator ?
Last edited by Coconutty; 19th May 2012 at 07:39.
Whitehead: nail on the head.
When I first took an interest in NPAS about a year or so ago, it was declaring a 22% reduction in costs. At the turn of the year it had reduced that to 11%. Since then, W Yorks have become involved, more people have been hired and actual progress is now underway to more understand what is needed to make the process work......what is the figure currently, I wonder.
I bet it's into single digits...................
Any news from Marshall about back tracking on Winsor / TFO's?
When I first took an interest in NPAS about a year or so ago, it was declaring a 22% reduction in costs. At the turn of the year it had reduced that to 11%. Since then, W Yorks have become involved, more people have been hired and actual progress is now underway to more understand what is needed to make the process work......what is the figure currently, I wonder.
I bet it's into single digits...................
Any news from Marshall about back tracking on Winsor / TFO's?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
National Police Air Service: Nine Helicopters Less | UK Police News - Police Oracle
Further down the article...
Cool, looking for VMispers on Perranporth Beach at 4 in the morning, will be slightly different scenery to Sandwell Valley 
Although I'm not convinced about the 20 minutes!
The new National Police Air Service (NPAS) is on schedule and will deliver better air coverage despite having almost 10 fewer helicopters than forces previously had altogether.
That is the view of ACPO lead for Air Support Chief Constable Alex Marshall (pictured) who said the NPAS would also cost 20 per cent less than the cost of total current regional provision.
He said although the total number of helicopters was being reduced from 33 to 24, they would be better and more sensibly positioned throughout the country to ensure adequate coverage of the skies. This will ensure the less than 20-minute response of aircraft is protected, he told PoliceOracle.com at the ACPO Summer Conference in Manchester.
He said: “I’m convinced it is doable – it will be a strong operational service and cost less for the tax payer.”
That is the view of ACPO lead for Air Support Chief Constable Alex Marshall (pictured) who said the NPAS would also cost 20 per cent less than the cost of total current regional provision.
He said although the total number of helicopters was being reduced from 33 to 24, they would be better and more sensibly positioned throughout the country to ensure adequate coverage of the skies. This will ensure the less than 20-minute response of aircraft is protected, he told PoliceOracle.com at the ACPO Summer Conference in Manchester.
He said: “I’m convinced it is doable – it will be a strong operational service and cost less for the tax payer.”
Further down the article...
CC Marshall said: “Forces will be sent the nearest available helicopter."
Although I'm not convinced about the 20 minutes!
Alex Marshall: this is a man who didn't even know that the Winsor report will affect TFO's? How much 'finger on pulse' is that then?
When people in elevated positions such as his - speak as he does - lesser mortals actually believe what is said.
Politicians will undoubtedly "want" to hear this from him and go away with a warm fuzzy feeling knowing the 'machine' is working as planned.
Meanwhile Joe public blunders on oblivious to what is really happening, not really caring until it impacts on them years down the line.
20 years ago there were no choppers in the skies of the UK. Does the public really really care?? Do they care that there will eventually be a saving by NPAS of about £5-6 million out of all this - nope. They are much more worried about their jobs and savings and homes.
So who is Alex Marshall talking to: the politicians - his bosses.....
When people in elevated positions such as his - speak as he does - lesser mortals actually believe what is said.
Politicians will undoubtedly "want" to hear this from him and go away with a warm fuzzy feeling knowing the 'machine' is working as planned.
Meanwhile Joe public blunders on oblivious to what is really happening, not really caring until it impacts on them years down the line.
20 years ago there were no choppers in the skies of the UK. Does the public really really care?? Do they care that there will eventually be a saving by NPAS of about £5-6 million out of all this - nope. They are much more worried about their jobs and savings and homes.
So who is Alex Marshall talking to: the politicians - his bosses.....
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In a world of my own!
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 years ago there were no choppers in the skies of the UK
Probably just a typo TC, I'm sure you meant 30 and were referring to Police Helicopters.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 years ago only the big boys had the toys, then we had the 2 decades of free money (running up the debt) that enabled the majority of smaller forces to join the club. Now the debts are being called in, we're going back towards the old days, but everyone will have access to the toys in future, of course some will have more access than others.
And that figure is much nearer 40 years than 20 even even if you discount the pioneers of the early 1960s [Durham, Oxford and Lancashire].
As we all know things back then were all about making the Chief Constable and Authority look good and that led to low availability expensive toys that did not meet the 24/7 need - and there are a few prime examples still out there in the west. Across the USA there are still dozens.
It is high time that things were regulated and made more inclusive and, perhaps, efficient and if the outcome ever matches the PR rhetoric that will be OK.
If [as we suspect] it does not this thread will never die away.
As we all know things back then were all about making the Chief Constable and Authority look good and that led to low availability expensive toys that did not meet the 24/7 need - and there are a few prime examples still out there in the west. Across the USA there are still dozens.
It is high time that things were regulated and made more inclusive and, perhaps, efficient and if the outcome ever matches the PR rhetoric that will be OK.
If [as we suspect] it does not this thread will never die away.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WH06
Not sure if you think you're letting me in on some secret.......
And another thing, you're grouping all jobs as incidents that require 15 minutes or less. I attended 3 mispers in 3 different counties last night/this morning, none of which would have been handled differently in 15, 25, 40 minutes so i disagree with your asumption that 15 minutes fits all.
Don't confuse me with some wet behind the ears novice
Back to the front page.....
Not sure if you think you're letting me in on some secret.......
And another thing, you're grouping all jobs as incidents that require 15 minutes or less. I attended 3 mispers in 3 different counties last night/this morning, none of which would have been handled differently in 15, 25, 40 minutes so i disagree with your asumption that 15 minutes fits all.
Don't confuse me with some wet behind the ears novice
Back to the front page.....
Last edited by Art of flight; 29th May 2012 at 08:44.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen plenty mentioned of immediate tasking of the aircraft. How are they planning preplanned events such as public order. I would have thought police services that do not have top level football, demonstrations or marches would not like to be funding the use of the aircraft for those tasks. Are NPAS going to move aircraft around to cover these events to ensure that police services are still going to have access to an aircraft for more responsive tasking?
Last edited by sss; 29th May 2012 at 18:46.
When I first took an interest in NPAS about a year or so ago, it was declaring a 22% reduction in costs. At the turn of the year it had reduced that to 11%. Since then, W Yorks have become involved, more people have been hired and actual progress is now underway to more understand what is needed to make the process work......what is the figure currently, I wonder.
I bet it's into single digits.............
I bet it's into single digits.............
The official line at RUSI last month was ZERO saving.
Rather than cost savings, the service is expected to provide more effective operations.
Guest
Posts: n/a
WH06
Not sure if you think you're letting me in on some secret.......
And another thing, you're grouping all jobs as incidents that require 15 minutes or less. I attended 3 mispers in 3 different counties last night/this morning, none of which would have been handled differently in 15, 25, 40 minutes so i disagree with your asumption that 15 minutes fits all.
Don't confuse me with some wet behind the ears novice
Back to the front page.....
Not sure if you think you're letting me in on some secret.......
And another thing, you're grouping all jobs as incidents that require 15 minutes or less. I attended 3 mispers in 3 different counties last night/this morning, none of which would have been handled differently in 15, 25, 40 minutes so i disagree with your asumption that 15 minutes fits all.
Don't confuse me with some wet behind the ears novice
Back to the front page.....
How many of those MFH searches had a realistic chance of success.
And how many we're merely "ticky box flights".
And how many reactive incidents were missed, where baddies needed catching, while the a/c was 2 counties away making sure the job doesn't get sued for not flying a misper search..!
Not a criticism. Just an observation. It's the same everywhere, and getting worse.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morris and AoF are both correct in that whilst many tasks require attendance inside 15 mins to have any chance of success, there are plenty of others that need more investigation, and proper searches of the immediate area, before deploying the aircraft. However if, as some units now do, you cover a much larger area than before, your 15 min circle moves around with you and significantly stretches the boundaries of effectiveness, especially if you're any distance away from the "centre point" of your patch.
The big bug-bear, as Morris has alluded to, is the ticky-box attitude of many forces in dealing with anyone considered vulnerable, or the top-cover required before AFOs get a move on with anything!! Keeping the aircraft noisily overhead some of these jobs un-necessarily is certainly in the ticky-box category and invariably wastes a valuable resource that should be able to immediately extract itself, if a job requiring speedy attendance presents itself, (and would be sensibly inside a 15 min window) where a delay would significantly reduce effectivity. {I'm not saying attendance at these mfh/AFO jobs is not valid, just that the time dedicated to some of them maybe longer than it should be.}
On a separate note, I understand from good authority that Mr Marshall was recently brought up to speed on the TFO "specialist" Winsor proposals and now appreciates that no "specialist" designation may well mean no "specialists" available . . . at all!
The big bug-bear, as Morris has alluded to, is the ticky-box attitude of many forces in dealing with anyone considered vulnerable, or the top-cover required before AFOs get a move on with anything!! Keeping the aircraft noisily overhead some of these jobs un-necessarily is certainly in the ticky-box category and invariably wastes a valuable resource that should be able to immediately extract itself, if a job requiring speedy attendance presents itself, (and would be sensibly inside a 15 min window) where a delay would significantly reduce effectivity. {I'm not saying attendance at these mfh/AFO jobs is not valid, just that the time dedicated to some of them maybe longer than it should be.}
On a separate note, I understand from good authority that Mr Marshall was recently brought up to speed on the TFO "specialist" Winsor proposals and now appreciates that no "specialist" designation may well mean no "specialists" available . . . at all!
The problem with the "Ticky box" type of job is that sooner or later (as has happened) a misper is found later having passed away. This was unfortunate and the A/C would not have made a difference, however when it happens again and the A/C is not even used who will get the blame? As sure as day follows night the CIM will point the finger squarely at Air Support and ask why we didn't deploy, and guess who we/you will point the finger at?
I don't know the figures but I'd imagine (guess) that somewhere in the region of 10% of Mispers are found by Air support? Most don't intend self harm but a few do....
I don't know the figures but I'd imagine (guess) that somewhere in the region of 10% of Mispers are found by Air support? Most don't intend self harm but a few do....
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
I don't know the figures but I'd imagine (guess) that somewhere in the region of 10% of Mispers are found by Air support? Most don't intend self harm but a few do....
IMHO; that night, the benefits of air support and mispers proven and case closed. Having said that....I wonder how long NPAS would have allowed us to look !
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't know the figures but I'd imagine (guess) that somewhere in the region of 10% of Mispers are found by Air support? Most don't intend self harm but a few do...
Certainly in my force area the control room is handling between 1 and 20 incidents PER DAY, whereby someone is threatening "self harm".
As an ASU we get involved in varying proportions depending on who the incident manager is at the force control room. At the moment we arent allowed to say no them.
All i will say is, barring the odd exception, we find very, very few, of the ones we lift for.
If we were allowed advise on the ones we lifted for, then that figure would rise massively.
However time and time again, force incident managers take NO notice of our advise as to the suitability of the task, and the result is hours and hours of wasted flights.
(any none police readers on here may well think us somewhat brutal with this and say "well just go and look anyway, just in case".
However... ask anyone in the policing world and they will always tell you that the ones that you worry about are the ones that just go away and do it. They dont ring up constantly giving "clues" where they are, or make demands about seeing ex girlfriends, etc etc.
The sad fact is that if someone is determined to take their own life, a lot of the time you just cant stop them, or find them, if theyre serious about it)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely, in these times of austerity, it must be a viable task to fly on,
otherwise it's just a waste of time & money.
Would the same Senior Officer still "order" you to deploy if your response was :
"In my professional opinion, having considered all available information, it is not viable to deploy the helicopter on this task, and the costs of doing so will therefore be passed to your department if you order us to do so."
Unless the "Senior Officer" is a POLSA trained officer, it is unlikely that they fully appreciate the capabilities of the aircraft, equipment, costs etc etc,
and knowing they have to hand the job over to the next shift, are turning it into an "ACE" job ( Arse Covering Exercise ).
Out of interest, how many ASU's have POLSA Officers, or Misper Search advisers on their crew, that technically "trump" the knowledge of the "Senior Officer" making the request ?
otherwise it's just a waste of time & money.
Would the same Senior Officer still "order" you to deploy if your response was :
"In my professional opinion, having considered all available information, it is not viable to deploy the helicopter on this task, and the costs of doing so will therefore be passed to your department if you order us to do so."
Unless the "Senior Officer" is a POLSA trained officer, it is unlikely that they fully appreciate the capabilities of the aircraft, equipment, costs etc etc,
and knowing they have to hand the job over to the next shift, are turning it into an "ACE" job ( Arse Covering Exercise ).
Out of interest, how many ASU's have POLSA Officers, or Misper Search advisers on their crew, that technically "trump" the knowledge of the "Senior Officer" making the request ?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On our Unit all the TFOs are trained in the use of the Grampian data and as such their advice is seen by their senior officers as tactical advice and accepted as such therefore if a request is declined the senior officers understand the decision has been made by experts and therefore unnecessary waste of flying hours is averted.
Secondly the TFOs will only consider lifting for a missing person if they deemed by the investigating officer to be high risk and that said there are certain strict criteria that have to be satisfied prior to deployment.
All of the above insures that ground supervisors complete their most basic enquiries prior to requesting an air-asset instead of making an unjustified request to complete a speculative search again wasting flying hours.
The result of this use of data can increase the units location of missing persons and on many occasions missing persons have been found thanks to input from the TFOs without having to leave the office.
Secondly the TFOs will only consider lifting for a missing person if they deemed by the investigating officer to be high risk and that said there are certain strict criteria that have to be satisfied prior to deployment.
All of the above insures that ground supervisors complete their most basic enquiries prior to requesting an air-asset instead of making an unjustified request to complete a speculative search again wasting flying hours.
The result of this use of data can increase the units location of missing persons and on many occasions missing persons have been found thanks to input from the TFOs without having to leave the office.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can second BS's post.
As something of a wandering police driver
I can confirm that Chiltern have developed a very sensible agreed process for handling mispers/MFHs with informed TFOs, which materially improves the hit-rate and avoids wasted flying time. It does require acceptance of their competence, by senior management. There are/were some other ASUs similarly placed, but a lot who are still forced to operate on the basis of requesting rank, rather than level of knowledge and viability of the search.
Perhaps this is one of the first areas where NPAS could actually benefit operational effectiveness, by adopting a similar nationwide approach?
[Not holding my breath though!]
Do remember though that there is another benefit of using the aircraft to clear an area. It saves on the use of scarce ground units. People who have not been involved would scarcely believe how many police resources are thrown at misper searches. They can sometimes denude a patch of almost all "bobbies on the beat" and similar for days at an end.
As something of a wandering police driver
I can confirm that Chiltern have developed a very sensible agreed process for handling mispers/MFHs with informed TFOs, which materially improves the hit-rate and avoids wasted flying time. It does require acceptance of their competence, by senior management. There are/were some other ASUs similarly placed, but a lot who are still forced to operate on the basis of requesting rank, rather than level of knowledge and viability of the search.Perhaps this is one of the first areas where NPAS could actually benefit operational effectiveness, by adopting a similar nationwide approach?
[Not holding my breath though!]
Do remember though that there is another benefit of using the aircraft to clear an area. It saves on the use of scarce ground units. People who have not been involved would scarcely believe how many police resources are thrown at misper searches. They can sometimes denude a patch of almost all "bobbies on the beat" and similar for days at an end.
Last edited by Helinut; 4th Jun 2012 at 15:30. Reason: grammar