Sar

[Yellowbaron]

:mad:
Has anyone noticed the huge amount of unhappy people at work and across the flights?
Shift changes.
Redundancy.
PVR.
We are getting tired.
When will someone up above help?
Will this speed up the transition?
The engineers are getting made redundant on the Friday then sign onto a new contract on the Monday.
True? No, but sounds as crazy as everything else that is happening.

[The Swinging Monkey]

Nice on Baron!

Not sure what your post is about, but it gets my vote!
Kind regards
TSM

[Anita Bush]

Is it about the imminent announcement ref St M? (Thursday methinks!!!)

Nice on Baron!
What????!!!??
:ok:

[vecvechookattack]

Absolutely....I fully concur.

Heard the other day that Bristows are short finals to lose their contract. Any truth in that one?

[SARowl]

The MCA has notified Bristows that the preferred bidder for the Coastguard SAR helicopter contract is CHC/Scotia.

Bristows wanted to carry on with the S61 for the period 2007-2012 or until a definite decision was made about the harmonisation aircraft. However, Scotia have bid with a mixture of S92s and the AB139, placing themselves fair and square in the frame for the harmonisation contract.

[vecvechookattack]

Brill, that sounds a good choice.

[SARowl]

vecvechookattack

Interesting statement. Why do you consider the S92 and AB139 brill? neither aircraft is certified nor approved nor proven in the SAR role. The AB139 has no icing clearance and a max rotor engagement windspeed of 27 kts.

Doesn't sound that brill!

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

SARowl,

You will have to excuse him, he regularly posts troll like drivel :rolleyes:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[JTIDS]

A new airframe to replace the Seaking / S61 has to be the way forward....

These things can't keep running forever.

[Helibelly]

Hey, when's this post going to turn into a slanging match like all the other threads on SAR.

[vecvechookattack]

The S92 is a little too big for my liking. Having a vast experience of both Military and Civil SAR operations (remember Plymouth Rescue ?) I'd have to plump for the AB139. Fast, light and agile it will prove a real asset to the MCA.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

So I guess this means that we'll lose the big yellow taxi all together then?

[SARowl]

What aircraft is used for harmonisation depends on many factors. The three main contenders seem to be the S92 the EC225 and the EH101. All aircraft have their pluses and minuses. Vested interest, political maneouvering and economics will play a part in the decision.

Other questions to be answered are; how will they be manned? Where will they be based? What will the command structure be?

[[email protected]]

....and will CHC give us all jobs when the military disown us and hand over SAR lock stock and barrel?

[serf]

Nobody in their right mind would give you a job Crabnolonger@..

[Styron]

http://www.shetlandtoday.co.uk/Shetlandtimes/content_details.asp?ContentID=17828

[vecvechookattack]

and will CHC give us all jobs when the military disown us and hand over SAR lock stock and barrel?

Why not? Bristows did so why not CHC.

[SARowl]

The command structure of the new harmonised SAR helicopter units is a very interesting question. The Treasury, the MCA and civilian helicopter operators would like to see a commercial, civilian SAR force. Commercial operators are cheaper and more efficient. However, the training and more importantly the PR value to the military cannot be overlooked. AFC's alround to a military crews rescuing people from the roofs of Boscastle makes very good press.

[running in]

SARowl,

I agree that the S92 is a contender for harmonization, but not the current S92A.

In 4 years time a civil S92B will be a spin off from the Canadian Cyclone S92. For a good SAR machine the S92 will need some more power, so the CT7-8C not the current -8A. It will need more payload, the basic S92 is very heavy and so a weight increase above the current 26,500 lb will be needed - so perhaps a new gearbox as well?

The proposed fly by wire version will be nice and improve handling qualities. Also a 5 bladed head to reduce the vibration.

So, the S92B will be a contender but it won't be around for a few years yet.

vecvechookattack

When you hang a hoist (or two), a FLIR & Skyshout off the side..fill up the back with SAR kit, the fast and agile AB 139 will be a bit more sluggish. You can't squeeze a quart into a pint pot!

RI

[[email protected]]

Helibelly - Serf seems to have answered your question.

[Helibelly]

Just ignor him crab, they gave me a job! :@p

ps s92=shiney=good

[SARREMF]

Not again!

Do we really have to go round this buoy again and again.

Currently, we have an IPT who are actively working various solutions. Unless something has changed, and I think not, we have a commitment to have military personnel in SAR under SAR H - you will note I said personnel not a platform replacement program.

Why, Not for medals but for skills, its a growing ground for skills that we - the military - wish to maintain. Now you can argue untill the cows come home over what value that really does give to the SH force but, thats what has been stated.

SARowl, C2 is where there must be a question, personal view - you have to have military C2 for mil operators. However, there are examples where the military work the other way round. At the end of the day its all about money. If, and I say IF, the money dries up then either the program moves right or you then question why we have military in SAR. Oh, but if the money dries up and you make that jump to zero mil presence then who pays for SAR? It will then have to come out of the DTI or direct from the treasury, as opposed to the Mil budget. That sounds like a delay again too, because they would have to form a group to study the problem etc etc etc etc

Crab, I know you, you are not normally this pessimistic - or at least last time we met you were'nt. Things must be bad!

[[email protected]]

SARREMF - not pessimistic but I think I can see the writing on the wall for Mil SAR, other than good PR we don't provide any of the 'core business' of the MOD. The 'rest tour for SH' and the 'distribution of skills' argument are valid but in no way overwhelming, especially when it comes to money.

Just like when a station gets closed after new buildings and investment, I think the death knell for the SAR force sounded when the MOD stated there would be a continued military presence in SAR. I am afraid that a mixed civvy/mil SAR flight just wouldn't work - too many conflicts of interest (pay, rules, working conditions, time off, check rides, deployments.....etc).

Frankly since the end result seems inevitable, we should 'cut to the chase' and make 2007 the full implementation of SAR going to MCA control, DTI funding and CHC as service providers. Why pi** about trying to keep the Sea King going well past its sell-by date, wasting money on engineering contracts to support said machine and generally firefighting to prolong the agony of something which is long overdue for a change.

[Green Flash]

A question. If SAR is civilianised, where does that put our CSAR capability? Surely we will keep some SAR in house?:confused:

[Bertie Thruster]

Sounds like Crab is coming up to an option date!

[[email protected]]

Bertie - only the retirement one and then not for another 11 years!

Green Flash - the SARForce does not do CSAR in any way shape or form, just because CSAR includes SAR in the title doesn't make it the same. I don't think a bright yellow helicopter sat in a 50' hover is the most tactical of options. CSAR is a Combat and therefore SH role.

[Bigtop]

Some interesting assumptions being made on this thread! So I'll make a few more from some snippets I have gleaned recently.

SAR H - will definitely be a PFI. Platform buy to be in the order of £900m/£300m respectively civ/MoD. Platform yet to be decided but will replace Mk3a, Mk5 HAS and civ S61. IOC by 2015 with FOC by 2017. Alledgedly 100 mil personnel - that's across the board ie absolute max total.
I believe S92 and AB139 are two of the options that will be considered. EC225 not mentioned but that doesn't discount it alongwith CH149 etc.

It is not intended to buy a single platform capability replacement for the Sea King but a mix n match of two, thus giving a more agile, economic! type capability alongside a heavier/longer range more expensive!! capability.

Basing will reduce from the current no of mil stations and significantly from what I recall.

[Data-Lynx]

If it is the same meeting in the last few days, didn't the presenter say, carefully, that it was up to the limits stated for mil staff?

[Bigtop]

Personally, if your gonna civilianise it go the whole hog and let the other helo forces have the mil manpower.

Partnerships always prove prickly from my experience so lets cut and run now. There'll be plenty who will off rank tabs and blend into the background and just like Mr Benn will reappear as if by magic sporting white stripes!

[Radoper]

I have read this thread with interest as my last tour was in the ARCC, not surprised at the sentiments shown here as it seems symptomatic of all that is going on in the Royal Air Force and the militairy just now.

That said, in my current line of work as a Radio Operator on the Rigs I would just like to say that SAR crews are held in VERY high regard by all who work offshore. We are well aware that if the poo hits the fan in a serious way just who is coming for us. Just last week R128 took a man from our standby vessel who had a suspected heart attack .. Nice job and many thanks to those involved.

Decided to post this as I was checking my home area's website and came across a thread praising those involved in SAR Helo operations. Lossie were involved in that incident I believe, search for a missing fisherman. Not good at doing links but please check out www.caithness.org , General Chat on the message board, thread is called "Brave Men".