pasptoo - If I missed your points, perhaps you have not made them clearly -
Yes, I agree that NVG ops and OC are perishable like IF if not used, that could also be used in the number of call outs a unit can expect – no? (Chivoner, Lossie, Gannet 300+, Wattisham, Lecon, Sumburgh 100+) I’m sure everyone has thrown away at least one job? (much to their professional annoyance.)
Do you mean we should accept a lesser capability because if we can't do a job we can throw it away? Not nice if you are the one who needs rescuing!
With the new aircraft, and perceived problems associated with the S92, will most not need re-training, current practice or not? I believe that the RN was non-NVG until about 5-6 years ago for SAR ops – they seem to cope reasonably well with “limited experience”. Prior to that it was white light overland – not something I’d relish.
Again not sure what your point is - the RN crews are in current SAR NVG practice - that is why they can do what they do. Any non-current SAR NVG pilots will have far more training required than a simple type conversion (which doesn't take long in civvystrasse because it costs money).
I understand that RN SAR pilots until recently were multi tour guys/girls with a solid aviation background at both sea and shore before going into the more “dedicated” SAR jobs. Small ship flights would be on SAR standby as soon as the ship left the harbour wall until it got back. No “seconds” just “first standby” 24/7!
Sadly the second sentence cost you a crew and a Lynx a couple of years ago - dedicated SAR means exactly that - it's not a secondary role when you train and perform it properly. I didn't say that RN SAR was full of first tourists, just that many of those who do it don't make a career out of it.
From basic flight school I was told there was more than one way to skin a cat! Everyone can learn from everyone else, don’t close the training office door! I assume from your “user name” you have done an exchange tour? Did you learn how they did their business differently, did you try to persuade them the RAF way or did you both learn from each other? I would like to think the later would make everyone a richer more rounded person.
So why is it that everyone is queuing up to tell the RAF how to do SAR - do they all think they have nothing to learn from us? All we hear is that there are other, better, cheaper ways to do it the way we do - usually from those who have no idea how we do business or the capability we maintain.
I agree that most winchmen/radops/winchops/aircrewmen/obs (paramedics) will require to come from a preset path, however the drivers could come from many areas providing they have the requisite skills. You could train some paramedics to be winchmen? Air Knight guys will be somewhat down the line from military SAR currency if they are successful, does that make them any less capable?
I don't know what you know about Air Knight that the rest of us don't but current front-line SAR is current front-line SAR whatever the uniform. The CG winchmen do the same paramedic training as the mil guys and at the same place (Oh look that was done through the RAF as well!)
We fly a lot of paramedics to familiarise them with what we do and how we can help them - how many of them would be prepared to face the physical danger a winchman does on SAROPs - precious few! And of those, how many would have the aptitude? Don't forget, SAR rearcrew are volunteers for good reasons.
According to your logic re NVG training - why don't the airlines take me instead of a trained person to fly 747s, after all I have 100 hours of single jet in my logbook and all I need are a few courses? Oh yes, I remember - it's cost of training and that is the issue regarding non-current SAR pilots and rearcrew vs current military crews - you get a proven recent track record and all the transferrable skill sets - you just add a type conversion and away you go - cheap as chips!
Geoffers - we are not replacing the SARF because it costs a lot (and like everyone else you assume it is more expensive without any figures to prove it) we are replacing a military SARF with a hybrid because the MoD has failed to invest in medium lift helicopters for the last 20 years and the ones we are using now are getting old and tired.
We started down the SARH path because of the ambitions of a previous Chief Coastguard and what could have been solved with a PFI for power by the hour on a new aircraft whilst retaining the present structure, has turned into a monster that will cost £3 -5 Billion for the next 25 years without bringing any new capability to the role.
All those who think it will be a civilian controlled environment are forgetting that the MoD is footing 70% of the bill for SARH so the defence budget is still hammered, there will always be a mil presence in SAR, and no-one will save any money.