Crab, it's not the same. It was never going to be the same no matter what happened.
I would say that it is already of equal value overall through the reliability of the aircraft and the raft of excellent modern kit.
Two or three years from now I fully expect that it will have put all that old fogey yellow rivet-bag stuff completely in the shade. What we, who hugely respect the work that has been done by MilSAR across 60+ years, really do not need during that period is to have you forcing us to cast that service in a negative light when it is just not necessary.
It's over. It was good. It was heroic. It was yet another British military triumph of skill and determination overcoming idiotic bureaucracy and rubbish kit. "The floppy, carbon-based, ape-descended life-forms in the green onesies" made it happen.
Tomorrow is another day. A day of powerful engines, glass cockpits, double winches, computer mission systems, satellite comms, huge downwash, short servicing periods and a decent cab heater.
In 2016, a few things need to happen to ensure that the work of your generation of British military SAR practitioners is not just adequately respected but also competently developed.
- The new incarnation of the Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre needs to be competent. It won't be the same either. It will have some new fancy kit and new people in a new location. Many of us remain concerned about the change. Of course, like the helicopter service, the old way was good but it wasn't perfect either, and it is only fair that matters related to the new centre are considered in that light.
- The Yeovil/Bristow AW189 needs to get sorted.
- It would be good if the AW189 situation does not distract Bristow from introducing NVG early at the two bases with the most darkness!
In 2017, three bases change contract and one closes.
Beyond 2017, we need to keep making noises about how the next generation of civilian SAR Technical Crew are trained. Should this be a licensed aviation trade?