I see that Sid's not been around for a couple of weeks. Silenced by the gag order?
About a month ago, I emailed the PCCs of the Forces that seem to have come off worse with NPAS(ie, paying more, considerably in one or two cases, for sometimes less hours), and asked them if they thought they were getting value for money and were they satisfied with the NPAS setup. Received one reply so far. Here is part of the reply:
I share your concerns. However the police could not go on with each force running its own air wing with different airframes, different equipment suites in similar aircraft, different ownerships of aircraft and completely different contractual arrangements. It was hugely wasteful.
In reply to your two questions the answer is probably no and no. I agree with some of the points you make, not others. There should be sustainability, so that if a crewman is sick or on leave there is an immediate replacement. The same with pilots.
Savings are being made, but in the current financial climate probably not enough. Helicopters should only be used when absolutely necessary. Very few tasks require a helicopter, a fixed wing would do the job perfectly well at a far lower cost and less obtrusively. This is being addressed, albeit slowly.
Most of the points you raise are about management, and I will take up those issues. ........I do have the background not to have the wool pulled over my eyes on the running of NPAS.
I have some major issues with the way NPAS was rapidly put together without enough thought, and we are now in the teething trouble stage that should have been avoidable. It will take time to sort out. You cannot run what is a fairly complex aviation company and expect senior police officers to know how to run it. It will be sorted out, but not as quickly as it should be