Thanks Louis - that was what I was after. I remember the study being dissected at the SARF conference when it was first displayed since this was supposed to show how few SAR bases we needed, especially if you have a 150kt helicopter.
It would be interesting to see if the subsequent datasets from recent years show the same distribution of jobs - if so then closing Lossiemouth is the obvious answer!!!
Then get rid of Leconfield and Lee because Wattisham could cover those areas!! Or leave Lee and close Portland.
These ideas are clearly barking but based on the same data used to suggest Chiv and Boulmer go to 12 hours despite Chivenor being the 2nd busiest SAR flight and having more high and medium high risk areas in its patch than any other flight except Valley.
The use of the transit time as a marker ignores callout time which is 3 times longer at night and doesn't appear to be factored in.
The geographical argument that a SAR flight generates its own jobs is flawed - people get into trouble in the same areas because of the geography, not because there is a SAR flight there. Brawdy closed but their patch is still a medium high to high risk area!