PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - SARH to go
Thread: SARH to go
View Single Post
Old 20th Nov 2009, 17:21
  #1194 (permalink)  
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,351
Received 636 Likes on 278 Posts
As it happens, Boulmer, Leconfied, Valley and...you guessed it... Chivenor went to Cumbria last night (5hrs day 5hrs night) - exactly the sort of surge capability that will be lost under SARH.

We were planning a mountains detachment to Cumbria starting tomorrow but that has understandably been cancelled - our engineers (who would have deployed with us) however, have offered to place themselves on standby this weekend in case engineering support is required up there, whether for our aircraft or Valley and Lec's. Is that the sort of thing we will see under SARH? Unlikely since I keep being told a modern SAR flight will be run with only 2 engineers per shift so being able to generate 5 keen and well motivated guys, who won't get paid any more for it, to go and work in crappy conditions just ain't going to happen. I might add that our engineers are civilians but their ethos is true military!

Tallsar - where did £6Bn come from?? talk about inflation, it was £3-5Bn only a short while ago!!! The IPT offered up the cuts based on percentage of night jobs which meant that Leconfield and others with a lower overall job count scored higher in percentage terms than Chivenor with the highest RAF flt job count year after year - that is the sort of thinking that makes me beleive the IPT has lost the plot.

Your super-efficient view of how little Chivenor contributes to UK SAR that it can be reduced in operating hours with impunity is very disappointing especially since you live in the area - have a look in your local press to see how many people disagree with your viewpoint - including the other rescue services.

The talk of libeboats and CG cliff teams sounds plausible but cliff teams are slow to get going and even the best lifeboat in the world can't get to someone stuck on rocks in high seas.

Cutting SAR flights further, as you and others have advocated, ignores the very real need for surge and concurrent ops which won't be possible with fewer aircraft and bases - it's not just the winching rescues, its the rural isolation of many areas of UK which rely on medtransfers. All the bollocks about faster aircraft meaning fewer bases is flawed logic which ignores both historical precedent and common sense.

Last edited by [email protected]; 20th Nov 2009 at 18:05.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline