Omerta
I hope you're not expecting an answer. As soon as you ask anything resembling a searching question to the current UK civvy SAR fraternity the shutters come down and a form of Omerta comes into play. One contributor suggested this was down to 'commercial sensitivity' a few months ago but that's nonsense. Those same people that shut up shop when asked a perfectly reasonable question are more than happy to breach 'commercial sensitivity' and fly the flag when they want to brag about something. Put them on the spot though and the code of silence reappears. Do they not realise that these are often questions that are in the public interest and a public forum where straight answers (ie non-management speak) can be given is the ideal place to allay fears and inform others that aren't in the know of how things are progressing? But those opportunities aren't taken and that can lead to the conclusion that things aren't going well.
A commonly expressed concern is that the 'no reduction in quality of service' principle will be compromised by the inadequacy of some aspects of the training that is undertaken. Not practising night wets appears to be a classic example. How can you expect to be able to rescue someone from the water at night if you haven't practised it? A few months back I asked someone/anyone to reassure us by giving us details of the currency requirements for frontline crews and therefore, as part of that, whether they did indeed practise night wets and that the concerns were unjustified. What did we get back? NOTHING. What conclusion should we therefore draw from that?
We constantly hear that civilian crews have been performing SAR in the UK since the mid 80s but when challenged to prove that they practised one of the most fundamental SAR disciplines, they didn't take the opportunity. I guess night wets must be a piece of p1ss. What else don't they practise I wonder?