Fascinating ( and to some extent revealing!) as the discussion about CU's weather factor is, there is one main reason behind the "vicinity" option against each of the present SAR base locations.
In part it recognises that politics will no longer allow any contractor complete freedom to base any future SAR helo organisation where they wish, be it the optimum disposition to deliver the new service or not. However, it does recognise that in some (note some) cases, the costs of ownership to the taxpayer in staying put may outweigh all the other factors, including some of the politics. This happened during SAR-H where despite political insistence that all 12 present bases had to remain the same, all the bidders finally got the message through that Prestwick was very expensive to keep going for 25 years, certainly as compared with the other 11 bases. Hence a compromise was reached where bidders could propose a move to a more cost effective location nearby.
The new competition has now encompassed this across all 10 remaining bases following pre competition discussions with industry. Bidders are unlikely to propose moving "down the road" unless there is a clear value for money reason to do so. Amongst a variety of factors, considering comparative implications of the local weather factor will no doubt be part of the decision.
