It now seems rather ironic that the SARH process was initially trumpeted as a 'blue-sky thinking' and 'completely free from constraints' concept, so far in fact that they weren't even allowed to mention helicopters because other 'platforms' might prove more efficient.
Many of us said at the time that it was all pointless bo**ocks and that the only decision you needed to make was which helicopter would be used.
Several years and many millions of £s down the road and that is fundamentally the choice - 2 bidders with similar bids using the same bases and needing plenty of mil people to jump ship to man those bases.
The final decider will probably be on cost (despite all the SARH claims that it wouldn't be) and there now neems little doubt that the new service will not be 'at least as capable' as the old service because there will be fewer operational bases at night.
Well done the Govt, MoD and MCA - what a successful outcome
Tallsar - quite a few of our night jobs are, as you suggest, within 50nm of Chiv which highlights how far Valley or Culdrose would have to come out of their patch to do those jobs, thus leaving huge holes in the SAR cover. It certainly isn't unusual for all 3 flights to be on night jobs at the same time so which poor punter will lose out?
As I have said before, one big loser will be the NHS who will very probably be denied the night medtransfers that they often request - if Culdrose or Valley had to take a patient into Central London then huge swathes of the country are again left devoid of SAR cover for several hours.
As to basing at coasts - apart from the short time to get to a PIW, the biggest advantage is the ability to recover at low level in poor weather with a coastal letdown or similar - something that Wattisham struggles with because of its comedy location inland.
The ability to recover to base rather than divert is important for several reasons; the aircraft can be serviced and rectified if required, the medical kit can be replenished, the crew can get quickly back into resting (at night) rather than faffing to organise hotels etc and, if the aircraft is U/S, the crew instantly have the second one available. Suddenly having inland bases doesn't seem such a great idea.
Sapper - I will ask the ARCCK but the 139s were still toted on the RCS until a couple of months ago as having no night, overwater winching capability and a crew that visited us earlier in the year confirmed that they were still waiting for the certification of the autopilot SAR modes. Have you actually tasked them to a PIW at night where they have completed the rescue? Anyone from Lee or Portland care to comment?