We are in a very early stages of the process leading to the new contract and it will be interesting to observe how many of the new ideas will still be there when the Contract Notice is published in about six months time. Even more interesting to observe how many of those ideas are still around six months after that when they have been subjected to some detailed scrutiny.
Small Unmanned Aircraft are now a part of Scottish Mountain Rescue's SAR toolkit. Internationally, ICAR are setting up a dedicated group to examine their use. That technology will not develop sitting on the shelf. We need to get it out there and find out what it will do. However, I share many of Crab's reservations.
No number of found missing persons in benign rural locations 100m from a road in good light will persuade me of the wider SAR value of unmanned systems. For these to be valuable, there needs to be significant progress in developing new working methods and new capabilities that add significant value.
Value? Now, what is the value? Current contract fixed cost: £1 600 497 465. Estimated variable cost (expectation 2015): £282 440 729. So that £282M is a lot of money but if you are still sending out the helicopter to do the 'posh hovering' later on many occasions, and too late on some occasions, then I am not convinced that one could make much of a dent in the £282M with current technology using current working methods.
Looking at the Schiebel Camcopter, it has Sea King speed and a 50kg payload that probably allows for a good FLIR ball and associated electronics. It has the range of a Westland Dragonfly so chasing after it to put fuel in it might be an issue.
The Elbit Hermes 900 has far greater range and payload and is now available with a rescue payload that enables it to drop rafts and other equipment near persons in distress. However, that range and payload is rather dependent on its cruising speed of 60 knots.
Where I believe search capability can be enhanced is in sensor capability. Two areas in particular have been identified as potentially major steps forwards during the next few years to help bring to bear the Mark One Eyeball onto the target.
1. Mobile phone detection.
Several makers across Europe now have mature systems for detecting and interacting with phones. One of those is being deployed by the Norwegians as part of NAWSARH. The Recco SAR underslung sensor also has the capability of detecting phones and other electronic devices in a very basic way.
2. Spectral Imaging
The ability to detect specific substances by their spectral signature is an established system for agricultural crop monitoring across much of the world. Once this is refined in a way that makes it an in-flight real-time process instead of an office-based post-processing method then we will have an awesome SAR tool. Several manufacturers and researchers across the world are aware of this potential or even conducting search experiments and trials.
================================================
I note with interest that the Director UKSAR Bristow, who made the quoted comments, is an ex-FJ pilot - perfect for overseeing RW operations!!!!
And ex-SAR base Station Commander.
To quote an experienced SAR Captain in a conversation at a Bristow SAR Base, "Russ
gets it!"
I would really like you to be FAIR to the incumbent SAR contractor Crab. Their SAR crews and chain of command are dominated by highly experienced aircrew of varied provenance who bring a range of relevant tools to the task. Moreover, I commend them for their openness and their constructive approach (not universal amongst helicopter contractors) which has contributed considerably to the quality of the current service. It will be a serious loss if the next contractor does not demonstrate the same communications skills with the wider SAR community.