Hi 3D - I do believe the points you make were within my rather long diatribe too - it certainly was why I pointed out how quickly Bristows did what they did at various stages of our UK SAR helo history. Of course, unlike the military, one of the main drivers is not only professional improvement but also the better positoning for business continuance and new business ie - the profit motive. That said ,the general point you make about the military being overladen with beaurocracy is perfectly valid, but not neccessarily worth placing the "blame" on the top brass. I know from experience that many such people were fully behind many sensible improvement intiatives - but sadly it is often the dead hand of the senior civil service within both MoD and always the Treasury, that kill many such efforts to improve things.
In RAF SAR terms, we were stuck with a dichotomy where the capability (without FLIR and even NVG) was deemed adequate for the rescue of military aircrew but whatever its merit in improving general civilan SAR - this was not deemd why the SARF was there! Yes I know - it was a blinding use of contradictory common sense - but that I fear is how government departments work (sadly!!) - particualry these days as they struggle to do as much as possible with grossly insufficent budgets. I amuse myself occasionally (How sad!) with thinking how infuriating it must now be for the SAR-H bidders who are now having to deal with not only one government department but 2, and the Treasury (remember previous civsar contracts were not dealt with at this level!), as they struggle to put something affordable on the table that will not get blown out of the water by these faceless "protectors" of the Queen's purse.
Cheers