The article says the diagnosis was a suspected fractured leg and I am commenting on the article as I have no other information. The point you can't understand is that I question is why there was a reason to use a helicopter.
I am bemused by the article stating that other resources were on the ground because I can't understand why the other resources didn't take the suspected fractured leg to the next door hospital. That doesn't make me a prat but just reflects the fact that this is a rumour network where we discuss the issues as presented to us. The media often get it wrong and this article may be total rubbish, but that is the fun of participating on this site.
I stand by my original opinion, namely that a suspected fractured leg next door to a major a and e department is normally properly managed by any front line vehicle and does not need a helicopter.
I understand from a local paramedic that there were 2 RRV's on scene and no ambulances were available to attend. The injury was reported as a dislocated fracture with suspected ischemia to the foot, therefore a crew request was made for Helimed to attend. Also Singleton hospital only has a GP led Minor Injuries Unit and the patient would not have been taken there anyway, either by land or air.