Crab, why do you always have to turn things in to a slanging match only to show your ignorance yet again?! You really do need to get out more.
While the S61 has twin VHF COM/NAV/ILS as required by civil regulations, it is essentially a pilot driven machine as is the Sea King. However, the Mk2 Super Puma has the capability to fly a fully coupled ILS and holds over beacons, plus many other extemely good features for SAR use which are definitely better than the current S-61/Sea King systems. I've seen it in use and it is good! No doubt the Merlin has, and the S-92 and AW139 will have such niceties as well. For SAR operations the limits are the same as yours where life or limb is involved. Then it is down to the skill of the crews with the kit that they have at their disposal. The only slight advantage the military may have is that you can use helmet mounted NVG. Makes mountain and cliff searches easier, but that doesn't mean that you can always get there while the other aircraft can't. I did many cliff and mountain jobs before NVG came in, the latter just made it slightly easier when the time of the month was right. Still didn't stop us attempting when it wasn't the right time of the month.
I apologise to those for going off topic, briefly to answer Crab.
In answer to Sven Sixtoo, I don't think there are conflicting priorities, there are two. The military has a need for CSAR, the civilian world a need for a day-to-day cover for any vessel or person in trouble. Up to a few years back, the military covered the civil SAR for all UK, but some areas were not covered well. That is why Sumburgh and Stornoway became civilian as they were a long way for Lossiemouth to get there quickly. Then the Navy started cutting back, so Lee-on-Solent and Portland became civil to cover that area's needs.
CSAR and civil SAR differ markedly in the way the work is done. Mind you, it would be fun to see a yellow Sea king pitch up to a job with two yellow painted Apaches for top cover
Perhaps a better way is for the RAF and RN to completely give up civilian SAR and the government to look properly at a fully funded Coastguard (including boats as well as aircraft) that would look after all civil SAR, fishery protection, customs and exercise work such as anti-drug, etc. If the operation was set up properly, it could be a quasi-military operation along the lines of the USCG. Aircraft could be used under the military flying regulations (i.e. military registered) but have the civil requirements as well. It could certainly take a lot of the other work that the military covers for the civil community allowing them to concentrate on what they should be doing, training for war. However, military pilts could be seconded for SAR experience if it was felt necesary by the Lords and Masters.
SARREMF. I like your thinking. However, there are others in both worlds who wont think logically like that, so we still end up with the discussions of who does it better or not.