Originally Posted by
finalchecksplease
Sadly it is clear to me from what i've seen on the UKSAR2G tender it is all about reducing costs and not augmenting capabilities.
Not entirely sure about that yet. Do they want value for money? Yes. Are they more interested in capability or cost saving? Look at the 2011-13 process and I think the answer is both: and capability appeared to be fairly high on the agenda.
We have about six months to go before contract notice. The industry and SAR stakeholder engagement processes are ongoing. There was no time for this in 2011-13 but we still got a world-class service out of it. If you have something to contribute then
the email is on the GOV.UK site so get stuck in.
If we consider that CAP 999 v2 never appeared until over a year after contract award, NVG regs were still being written as the contract started and then all the 189 stuff, who thinks there will be a regulatory solution for a fully capable and effective remotely piloted SAR by Sept 2024? No, me neither. So the whole UAS thing might just go away for a few years. Enhanced sensors, new winch tech, new PCDS, S-92B, AW189K, perhaps, but fully capable cost-effective UAS, not so likely.
Originally Posted by
finalchecksplease
Only one aircraft / base for instance is not workable IMHO ...
Various versions of history are out there for how this happened last time. My understanding is that, in the early stages, more than one bidder was looking at around 14 to 16 aircraft for 2 sets of 5 bases. How much the 22 aircraft was about Super Puma ditchings and how much was about legacy or BHL seems to be a bit muddied????