3Dcam - Thanks.
I never said the S92 and 139 were great SAR aircraft - they may or may not be now or in the future great SAR aircraft. But, given a choice between staying with the venerable S61 for another umpteen years or spending a couple of years sorting teething problems on a new aircraft (S92) and modifying (if required) the 139 to get them to give you a better overall capability for the future, then I know what my choice would be. I won't be surprised if military SAR ends up using the same aircraft at some time in the future so you guys can get them sorted before we fly them.
I never said you weren't all weather capable but in poor wx at night I suspect you won't go into places we will because you don't do NVG ops. Venturing out over land and mountains is not quite the same as regularly training there so there is a capability difference.
If Portland went 24 hour - they wouldn't venture all the way to S Wales would they? That is where a huge number of Chiv jobs are. They might get a few in S Devon but I still think we could get there quicker
I have no info on the funding, MoD or otherwise, of the MCA budget but I am assured that the service will improve under CHC - we'll just have to wait and see I guess. Whether you are a BHL fan or not, they have been doing the job a long time and now a decision has been made to give that job to someone else - why?
We only have 2 aircraft per flight but at any one time there will be 4 or 5 in deep servicing/modification/trials, the OCU at St Mawgan has another 3 and there are 2 in the Falklands. But our 1st amd 2nd standbys are produced from 2 ac, 8-10 pilots, 3-4 Radops and 3-4 winchmen - our manning levels, especially among the rearcrew are creaking a bit.
Cyclic - I don't think there is any secret that we are not winching on training sorties at the moment as a sensible precaution following a hoist malfunction at Chivenor this week. Operational winching for lifesaving is continuing as normal.