UK Police helicopter budget cuts

[morris1]

To be honest i fully expect the whole thing to civilianised.

There will be no actual "police work" being done anyway, so its pointless employing cops to crew the a/c.

Any old pleb with zero policing experience can wave the camera around looking for mispers and filming crowds at football matches. In fact they may as well advertise for staff from film companies to fill the posts.

I may have a bash once im retired, but in the mean time Ill go back to catching crims the old fashioned way. (and hope I dont need an a/c at any point.!)

[2896]

No one has once mentioned the force multiplier the police helicopter represents. Yes it costs serious money to operate but it saves even more money by supporting the bobbies on the street. If it wasn't for the helicopter you wouldn't have any bobbies in the street because they would all be down the local park/ sportsfield / fields looking for the missing old person/ young child/ suicidal/ sick person spending hours searching, you wouldn't have time for much else. How do you expect to follow a criminal round town/ village on foot or by car when you can't see over the fence/ wall especially nowadays when you no longer can rely on the public ringing in because they no longer spend any time in front of the kitchen sink looking out the window thanks to the dishwasher nor much time is spent in the garden since they are too busy running around trying to keep on top of their lives?

Do you know how much a death or an injury costs???? Offshore a death cost around £1.000.000 and I seem to remember on land the cost isn't far short of that. Google will tell you.

Now more than ever we need more rather than less helicopters.

I once had been told, only 4 years ago Merseyside would fly their tanks empty because they knew a helicopter overhead made for a safer town but because you can not actually put figures to this common sense .....

One last point if I may, I have also been told that it would cost several million pounds for NPAS to buy all those PBH contracts for all those new aircraft currently in the fleet coupled with the handful of new bases at £1.000.000 each I can't see any saving myself on the contrary.......

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: :ugh:

But some of you keep saying one should wake up and smell the coffee and understand change is coming and accept it. I am happy to accept change if it is for the better not for the worse.

[Fly_For_Fun]

The idea of national air support is a good one, I don't think that is in question. It is the method and the assumptions that are being made that are the problem.

[airpolice]

Fly for fun has hit the nail right in the head. But I don't think he means it.

The problem is the assumptions that are being made. You guys are complaining about what you think might be happening instead of waiting to hear what the detailed plan is.

[yme]

I agree with FFF, for a change. I like the idea of a national umbrella for Air Support. I for one would prefer we had a national police force and not individual fiefdoms.

I do believe the original announcement on NPAS was the equivalent of a thrown hand grenade. To not expect the people at risk to worry, snipe and moan is daft. Just pleased there is a forum where we can let it all go!



pilots would have to apply for a position in NPAS, and it would be open to anyone with suitable experience


This doesn't appear to be an assumption, but to be a lack of knowledge of the employment law. It is also inflammatory, almost to the point where someone may assume it was deliberately designed to fan the flames. Why would you announce that before doing your homework?

[airpolice]

yme, have you had any formal contact from the new Lords & Masters?

Have they sent details of the New World Order down the pipe to the coalface?

Perhaps they do not, as yet, have a fixed plan for what they are going to do, so they are not responsible for the panic by throwing a hand grenade.

They may well be responsible for some of it for not saying much, but they can't tell you what they don't know yet.

[Fly_For_Fun]

Fly for fun has hit the nail right in the head. But I don't think he means it.
airpolice, I don't really know what you mean :confused:

My take on it, from a sedentary position, is that like big business one needs to cover all the bases, so to speak, with enough resilience to get the job done and have a contingency for unforeseen events. This I think is what NPAS is about. How they have gone about trialling scenarios and working the options I don't know, but as YME says, they seem to have thrown a hand grenade and ran away with no answers to any of the options on offer, consequently rumour is rife and people seem to be very nervous. An example of this is to announce all sorts with regard the eastern area with the Met not being on board???? How does that work with 4 aircraft for that region and in the middle is a relativley small area served by a further 3 aircraft restricted by the M25 as a barrier. This is my point when I said this: It is the method and the assumptions that are being made that are the problem. because there seems to be no real answers for that particular imbalance, and many others I am sure.

[BobbyBolkow]

I've been reading this thread for a while now as I do have a (slight) vested interest. One comment caught my eye:-

pilots would have to apply for a position in NPAS, and it would be open to anyone with suitable experience

Without getting too far off the beaten track, I thought I'd lob this in:-
Under employment law (and I sit to be corrected here!) you cannot apply for a job/position you already hold just because the owner/operator has changed. This, to my mind, leaves 2 scenarios
1) If pilots have to apply for a position in NPAS, then it would have to be a generic position. i.e. not neccesarily where you are presently employed because of the statement above. If that is the case, would NPAS be liable for relocation costs etc, etc. If so, that would add again to real costings and subtract for the perceived savings. Better then to leave people in post surely. Which leads me on to
2) If you remain in post, you cannot apply for that position. However, as the 'operator' has changed, ALL pilots in post will come under TUPE (Transfer Under Previous Employment). Under TUPE, you MUST get the same, or better, terms and conditions than your last employer gave you. Can you imagine the legal costs of TUPE'ing all those pilots! The legal profession would think Christmas had come early. It would cost a fortune! So where (again!) are the savings?

There will be those who will disagree with me and thats OK :ok: But we do have rights brothers (and sisters) 'cos it was the government that gave them to us.

Just a thought!

[Fly_For_Fun]

Bobby I think you are right, pilots are either going to have to remain with their present employers, presumably having their terms and conditions brought up to a common standard throughout the NPAS organisation, or go through the expensive TUPE route, giving the same scenario as far as terms and conditions are concerned. Either way this, I feel, will be an expensive exercise. Perhaps another example of leaping before they looked?

[Brilliant Stuff]

As far as Tupe is concerned will there be a difference if the pilots are direct employed by the unit or through a civilian employer like PAS, PremiAir & Specair?

[yme]

Brilliant Stuff
I believe that will depend on the contract each individual is working under.
If one is contracted to work at a specific unit or even contracted to fly as a police pilot for a certain area then TUPE comes in to play. If one is contracted to a company as a general pilot, then that may be different.
I hope someone with more knowledge will post?

[Art of flight]

Some very constructive posts,

I'm no expert on these 'employment' matters, but as with a few others posting on this thread, I've been through the TUPE process from contractor to direct employment. I've also got my head in to a few of the many books available on this subject.

Transfer of Undertakings Protected Employment equals just that, one company taking on the existing employment arrangements from another on the transfer of business. The gaining company/organisation may alter terms and conditions for economic benefit but these would be broadly similar to those that exist. Those persons (employees) that are named or hold positions within the contract will be transfered, ie if you're already directly employed you will be employed by the gaining organisation, or, redeployed by the losing organisation, or offered redundancy. You will not be 'interviewed for your own job'. The job spec may change in the new organisation, but you should be offered training to suit, you cannot be replaced in that job without the gaining organisation going through a whole host of hoops.

If you believe your job is at risk then do yourself a favour, get down to the high street and browse through a few books, get online or better still if you're directly employed, look on your force intranet HR website for the written word regarding redeployment and redundancy. If you're not a member of your union (Unison) perhaps now is the time to rethink that situation, they can only give advice or represent you if you have been a member for at least 42 days when you present a problem. I've never had reason to use the Union but times are changing fast and they'll be there if I need advice.

Whatever you do, don't take employment advice from a rumour network, don't even take my advice, i might have made all this up, do what you can now for yourself, an hours research will let you know who's near the truth on here and who's talking complete b'''@@ks.

Happy to be of service;);)

[Digital flight deck]

Very sensible Art.

[Art of flight]

Thanks DFD

[Art of flight]

Follow this link for the written word.

TUPE - a guide to the regulations (http://www.tssa.org.uk/article-46.php3?id_article=1382)

regards to all

[What Limits]

I don't think that employees of PremiAir, PAS or SpecAir for instance will be protected by TUPE.

Not that I am an expert on TUPE but my understanding is that TUPE only applies if the Owner of the contract changes. For example. if SpecAir won a contract previously awarded to PremiAir, the pilots in place, would be protected by TUPE.

My best guess is that those directly employed will have to be given first kick of the cat.

[Art of flight]

WL

With regard to Contracted pilots....

Each of those employers will have contracts with the relevant forces at present. The options are, that the individual contracts are honoured to completion, ended early with penalties or transferred to the new organisation.

With the first option you don't spend any more money, but you continue to pay for something you're not using (if you no longer have an ASU)

The second possibly saves a little, but again you lose the service.

The third enables you to pass on the agreed responsibilities of the existing contract at the implementation of the National service and the new organisation then decides who to keep, redeploy or make redundant.

All in all it's a fairly closed loop, directly employed civilians (pilots/observers) and those provided by contractors are covered by TUPE. TUPE exists to ensure fair treatment of employees in situations such as these. As long as we all trust this legislation, the national air service implementation can be fairly smooth and orderly. Without TUPE we'd have units shutting down within months as pilots bail out early to miss the inevitable surge in around 18 months.

The contractors can of course keep their pilots and redeploy them or make them redundant, and here's the rub.....

If you're a contracted pilot have a look at your contract and then look at the Gov'ts redundancy calculator (don't expect to see many zeros in the answer). If you're directly employed by a force and have done more than a couple of years things look better.

I don't want to keep banging the drum for the Eastern/Southeast Region, but we went through this a couple of years ago so the managers and HR departments are as informed as any as to how to handle this and I'm sure will be giving good advice to the national team.

[yme]

Well said Art.
It is important that as many as possible of the people concerned are as informed as they can be.
Unison.

[Digital flight deck]

I wonder if the flying lawyer would be able to give a more knowledgeable take on the various employment dilemmas.

It all seems fairly straight forward at first glance, but of course that is from a position of ignorance and these things tend to come back and have a nibble at the proverbial. :confused:

[Eurocopper]

Quote:- "I once had been told, only 4 years ago Merseyside would fly their tanks empty"

Not quite, I think Dyfed Powys hold the record for that!

[airpolice]

Now that's not fair, Nick was only going by the book!

A cheap shot.... but very funny given the context!

[morris1]

My take on it, from a sedentary position, is that like big business one needs to cover all the bases, so to speak, with enough resilience to get the job done and have a contingency for unforeseen events. This I think is what NPAS is about.

you see this is the reason we are in this mess..

Policing IS NOT A BUSINESS..!!

Once the accountants start looking at law enforcement, it all goes up the swanny.
What price justice..?
Well if it has to have a price, who decides..?
Government, Police, Public, Management, Accountants, Lawyers...... ?

As a cop on the beat I would be sat at times at 5am in my patrol car, with nothing to do, other than patrol around looking for bad guys.!
The bean counters came in, ordered us all to fill in time sheets of our activities throughout the shift. And low and behold, some time later they changed the shift patterns so we were absolutley to the bone with staffing after 3am. Which is fine and dandy 80% of the time. However the other 20% of the time we did not have enough cops to do the job, and criminals were getting away as a result.

Bean counters cannot and will not accept cops, sat around waiting for things to happen. They will not accept that at times, you have to pay that price to have resources available for deployment.

Yes you could run a fleet helicopters across the UK cheaper than at present. But surely the way to go is study how direct employment of pilots and engineers compares to PAS and MACs.. What exactly ARE the figures..?

But my point is this. Please do not try and compare police work to business. Its not the same and never should be. Savings can be made, as they can in any organisation. However Police work is pretty unique in its position in society.
Just ask the families of PC Yvonne Fletcher, PC Sharon Beshenivsky, PC Gerald Walker, PC Ian Broadhurst.. just some of the many Officers murdered, because they were wearing a uniform and trying to fight crime. They werent murdered because they worked for a firm of management consultants, or at Tesco, or were doctors or nurses or vets.....

Let the police police.
Leave the accountancy for businesses that make widgets..

rant over..

[Fly_For_Fun]

morris1, it is not about treating the police service as a business, it is about applying a set of principles that work in all sorts of environments. You are being isolationist and that is a fundamental mistake. IMHO.

[Eurocopper]

Seems likely to me that

1. NPAS take over most existing contracts novated from Police Authorities.

AND

2. Contracts terminated prematurely attract compensation payable to contractor to cover redundancies and loss of profit.

AND

3. NPAS develops cadre of directly employed pilots with possible career structure within slimmed down service.

OR

4. NPAS outsources whole service to commercial operator in due course.

[Helinut]

Most contracts will have termination clauses in them. If the cops terminate a contract early, they will have to pay what the contract says, unless someone makes it sweet enough for the contractor to forgo the payout: e.g. by giving them another contract.

If I was a betting man I would suggest it ultimately will go out to tender and one of the big boys will dip their toes into the water.

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

More for less.....

Maybe some of the supervisors out there should get rid of the lazy bobbies. Leaving the keen ones that do go out and catch crimes. Then that would be value for money and all forces can then keep their choppers.:D

[Art of flight]

I think many on here are arriving at the conclusion that whatever the new system is, it will be in line with whats happening in the wider economy, providing only what is absolutely necessary and outsourcing with the cheapest bidder (though the cheapest bidder may in fact be direct employment;)).

Morris makes a good point about having people sitting around at 5am waiting for something to happen (someone has taken the risk and decided we can't afford that resilience), look what's happening to the Firefighters shifts. All I ask is for our PR and media to be honest with the public and the officers on the ground about what it is we can provide in future from a slimmer, cheaper system, so that they have a realistic expectation of the service provided.

[Digital flight deck]

You are of course right Art for Flight, however it will not take too long for the villains to realise that their is no air support after 5am. I suppose that would be a similie for setting fire to the helicopters, if you see what I mean. So perhaps 24 hours service is the way ahead, and more jobs for the boys in the process.

[airpolice]

Can any of you experts offer a sound reason why most of Scotland can manage without Air Support and all of Scotland manages without it after 22:00, without us being knee deep in ram raids and pursuits?

[tigerfish]

Perhaps it might be something to do with the fact that Geographically Scotland is a beautiful but sparsly populated part of the world, who's citizens are less disposed to ram raiding and vehicle pursuits. (Glasgow and other major centres possibly excluded).

The truth is, that despite the fact that you do not appear to want to believe it, that sort of crime does happen quite a bit South of the border .

However, we now all realise like you, that air support is a waste of time and money. Surely that is precisely why major criminal gangs have spent so much time in Mersyside and Birmingham trying to neutralise Police helicopters. They needn't have bothered!

Tigerfish

[Sulley]

Most of Scotland has to make do without Air Support because it isn't Scotland police it is a combination of individual forces. whilst they cover a large geographical area they don't have a large population - so basically they can't afford it. As for after 22:00 it isn't a case of managing without it - as if you want it you still get it , just takes a bit longer - but we all need to get used to that aspect of things!

[Final Flare]

Here is a thought..... everyone is discussing TUPE, how does it stand if a pilot is employed or contracted by a specific force to fly that specific force area using that specific forces' aircraft. Under NPAS, there will be no specific force aircraft and no specific force area.... It will be a totally new organisation, flying completely new areas. How do TUPE rules apply? I would suggest they probably dont and everyone, regardless of whether an aircraft is operating from their current base will have to apply for employment under NPAS.

[Digital flight deck]

I suppose that is the main outcome off all this restructuring, less aircraft over a larger geographical area means slower response times. Interesting that we are informed that the "20 minute response has not been affected", as I understood it , 15 minutes was the response time (a bit of a fib then). So there is a increase of 33% in the time a criminal has to do the job and get away on their toes. Sounds like a real bargain for the villains to me.

[Coconutty]

Let's toss this one in the pan and see what sizzles :

What would happen if a Chief Constable or Police Authority,
from one of the forces earmarked to lose their aircraft,
decided not to play along with the NPAS game,
and said - "OI - NPAS - NOoooooooo !" :rolleyes: ?
( Choose an appropriate regional accent to read the above line )

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[props stopped]

Re Coccunutys commnets, Pan, fire etc.

I think if the CC or authority councillors decided not to go along with NPAS (Home Office), then those councillors and Chief may find funding such an operation rather difficult in the present financial climate...

Clevelands police authority chairman has been quoted in the past that he didnt want to join other forces, but has now amalgamated his traffic and firearms departments with Durham! money or the lack of it sure changes how some councillors think UP north..I wonder which cap badge they will wear?

NPAS is long overdue, seeing how quiet some northern areas really are..

Its not about single force empires anymore..its about using air support in neighbouring forces when required, without the need for a senior officer to authorise its payment beforehand.

[Coconutty]

ACPO's own Press release confirms that the initial proposals are NOT set in stone,
and that there are LIKELY to be some changes ....

http://www.acpo.police.uk/pressrelease.asp?PR_GUID={4159BF46-892A-4ABA-B06E-8B2909D1353A} (http://www.acpo.police.uk/pressrelease.asp?PR_GUID=%7B4159BF46-892A-4ABA-B06E-8B2909D1353A%7D)

The following is a breakdown of proposed base sites. Please note that these are likely to change ( my italics) they are as highlighted in the original proposal only. They are also subject to sign off from the relevant police authority. This is the planning principle. It may change subject to addressing the concerns of some forces.

- Western Counties (currently serving Avon and Somerset and Gloucester) and Wiltshire (Consortium with Great Western Air Ambulance) will reduce to one aircraft, combine and relocate to a new base at RAF Colerne;

- Sussex and Surrey will reduce to one aircraft, combine and relocate to a new base at Dunsfold;

- Norfolk and Suffolk will reduce to one aircraft, combine and relocate to a new base at RAF Honington;

- Merseyside aircraft will be withdrawn from service with provision continuing from other bases in the area;

- South Yorkshire aircraft will be withdrawn from service with provision continuing from other bases in the area;

- Cambridge aircraft will be withdrawn from service with provision continuing from other bases in the area;

- Dyfed-Powys aircraft will be withdrawn from service with provision continuing from other bases in the area;

- The RAF Henlow based aircraft from Chiltern Air Support Unit (Thames Valley, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire) will be withdrawn from service with provision continuing from other bases in the area;

- Essex aircraft will relocate to Southend Airport;

- Dorset aircraft will relocate to Bournemouth Airport;

- West Midlands aircraft will relocate to work from Wolverhampton Airport creating a two aircraft unit with Central Counties (West Mercia and Staffordshire). Both aircraft currently work under the Central Motorway Police Group banner;So "Subject to addressing the concerns of forces" may well include, for example, the CC of South Yorkshire :

BBC News - Concern South Yorkshire helicopter 'could be scrapped' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-11594695)

.... But the plans in detail would take away the air base which we currently have at Sheffield, and we would then get our service from bases in West Yorkshire, Humberside and Ripley in Derbyshire.
.... I think that's too far away.
.... I will fight to make sure we continue to get the service we need in Sheffield, which of course is our busiest area.
.... and maybe the plans to have NO aircraft located in the "Second City", might also be a concern when you read ACPO's paragraph :

While the current service is capable of doing its day job, artificial boundaries have meant that helicopters are restricted to operating within their own force area. A national, borderless service will ensure effective coverage of urban and rural areas. How on Earth would moving an aircraft completely out of the second largest Metropolitan Police Force area,
result in more, or just as "effective coverage" of that mainly urban area ? :ugh:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[volrider]

NPAS is long overdue,
Its not about single force empires anymore..its about using air support in neighbouring forces when required, without the need for a senior officer to authorise its payment beforehand.

I think everyone would agree in fact when this was first muted all were looking forward to it, cross border co-operation no more post code lottery so that some areas don't get 24 hr coverage and pooling of resources. All great positives. What is narking people is the way it is all being done, not as a major push to help catch criminals and find vunerable persons, no it's down to cost cutting which ever way you look at it.
Those that know FA are once again in charge of ruining a great service:{

[ShyTorque]

outsourcing with the cheapest bidder (though the cheapest bidder may in fact be direct employment).

Outsourcing to the cheapest bidder was always a priority, in my own experience.

[PANews]

There are masses of issues that I cannot see being sorted out by 2014 never mind 2012.

Yes the national route ought to be explored but at the moment they have just said they are going to do it and thats that.

And what do we have in charge? The ACPO Lead is the CC of Hampshire FC... sorry ASU .... now deceased..... the main operator is Kent who have never had an ASU except a decade ago they had a £25,000 budget for occasional use of a Cessna 172.... and the centre of operations is the railway police who were only allowed air support for X hours a year when Jarvis Engineering also an RIP company were not using the helicopter to see whether the points were working.

Now which bit of that rich mixture is exuding experience of the product?

Based on their 'experience' this team has decided that there will be savings of some 15M ...... but as I think I may have indicated there is no experience... so why did they not go for gold and save £100m instead? I am sure they can produce figures to 'prove' it.

When the real savings [overspend] arrives will they admit it? Of course not, they will then decide it was a savings figure relating to '2020' because that is how long it will take them to divest themselves the debts they are going to build up buying out the various contracts.

[Digital flight deck]

PAnews, I think you have described the perfect formula for a government organisation.Well done.:D

[nige the learner]

Give it a few more years & it'll be a charity like the air ambulance. A disgrace, but that's progress!:ugh::ugh:

[SilsoeSid]

I keep wondering if anyone has actually asked RAF Colerne, Dunsfold, RAF Honington, Southend Airport, Bournemouth Airport or Wolverhampton Airport if they would/could actually be allowed to operate a Police Helicopter, or in some cases, increase the present helicopter operating hours and movements from their property.

I'm sure various financial managers are rubbing their hands in anticipation, but I can't wait for the locals to be told!

[props stopped]

If it was an air ambulance charity, it would make money.

Look at the air ambulance charity up here, they have just bought 2 dauphins, and still have change for a rapid response car.

[SilsoeSid]

Props,

Isn't this malarky the ultimate example of why Air Ambulances are charity run.


Also, it's about time companies such as 'Tracker' were charged for services.
For example;
http://www.tracker.co.uk/TRACKER/Documents/RecoveryUpdate.pdf
TRACKER Recoveries 19,964

£100 a recovery for example, would have generated almost £2 million so far!
They would have to pay up, otherwise the company won't be able to exist when all the Police vehicles have the kit taken out!

If BT etc can charge Police Forces a fee to triangulate mobile phones, why not?

[airpolice]

Sid, there are not as many tracker equipped cars out on the road as you might think, and even some of the few that are, belong to Tracker not the Police.

The current state of Tracker work, by the Police, is shadow of how it started out.

[nige the learner]

props stopped. Well done to the team up there - that's a tremendous achievement.

As for Tracker, when I had my car stolen they were useless. 2 police cars couldn't find it - had to get the copter up in the end. Tracker were completely unhelpful & the system is far from flawed I found out.

N

[volrider]

I have read through the posts and I think I should hold my hands up and say congratulations to NPAS, they have brought the ASU's together and achieved some goals that I had thought were not going to happen.

1: Ground the Liverpool aircraft where the scallies depite numerous attacks had failed

2: Remove the helicopter from Birmingham again despite the scallies
destroying one they returned like the phoenix from the flames.

3: Removing the South Yorks helicopter despite being very busy.... err that goes for the two above as well!!!

4: Moving the Birmingham helicopter out of the area and putting two at Wolverhampton where security is non-existant and now that its been on the news the scallies are already filling up their petrol cans.

All to save 15m which is nothing in the grand scheme of things, I reckon a few cuts to the PM and other MP's discreet private budgets would more than cover that, but hey the PM's wife must have her stylist at 60k a year:mad:

The loonies really have taken over the asylum:ugh:

[Skidkid]

Also, it's about time companies such as 'Tracker' were charged for services

Mmmmmm, let's have a think about this. Believe it or not, apart from saving life, it is the primary role of the police to prevent and detect crime!

Volvo, BMW, Vauxhall, Ford, Motorola, Sepura, BT, O2, Vodafone, etc etc all provide equipment to police services in order to help them carry out their duties. All of them make large profits by charging the police authorities, and ultimately us the tax payer, for supplying their equipment.

Tracker, however, provide their equipment free of charge!!!

[doublesix]

Tracker, however, provide their equipment free of charge!!!

And if they didn't and no Police Force chose to purchase the equipment they'd be out of business:bored:

[SilsoeSid]

Mmmmmm, let's have a think about this. Believe it or not, apart from saving life, it is the primary role of the police to prevent and detect crime!


I would have thought that by virtue of the fact that a Tracker activation has taken place, it is not only too late to prevent the crime but the Tracker unit has already detected the crime! ;)


Yes, Volvo, BMW, Vauxhall, Ford, Motorola, Sepura, BT, O2, Vodafone, etc etc do provide the equipment to the police services paid for by the public... for public duties, however I would suggest that this type of equipment fulfils a multitude of roles in service of the public and just jobs for a particular commercial company.

Do the Police just do jobs related to BMW crime in their BMWs? Would they only attend a robbery at the Ford garage in a Fiesta? And goodness me, if Carphone Warehouse was to be ram raided, would everyone available be sent on foot :ugh:

In the case of Tracker equipment, as highlighted, it is provided free, (electronics are cheap these days, both the receiving and transmitting systems), yet the punter is charged quite a price to have it fitted to their vehicle/plant etc.


It just seems not quite right in these times, that a commercial company such as RBS, with assets of £1.696 trillion rely on a struggling public service to do all the work for them for no cost.

[timex]

Some Constabularies have very few (if any) cars fitted with Tracker..

[Marco]

SS - In fact NPAS have not visited Colerne at all.

[SilsoeSid]

timex
Some Constabularies have very few (if any) cars fitted with Tracker..

Perhaps you'd like to take that up with Tracker/OFT, false advertising perhaps?


TRACKER is the ONLY stolen vehicle recovery system operated by all police forces across the UK. TRACKER - Why Us (http://www.tracker.co.uk/TRACKER/TrackerWhyUs.aspx)

[airpolice]

TRACKER is the ONLY stolen vehicle recovery system operated by all police (http://www.tracker.co.uk/TRACKER/TrackerPolice.aspx) forces across the UK.

With over 1,500 police patrol cars and 30 helicopters across the UK fitted with TRACKER’s detection equipment, the chances of recovering your stolen vehicle are greatly improved.

Anyone know of a force with 30 Tracker equipped cars out on the road at any one time, or indeed, available ? Even as an average number, it seems a bit high to me.


From the same web site (Tracker)



New Study Reveals That Global Satellite System Could Fail In 2010

TRACKER believes it is ready for any eventuality

News that the Global Satellite System (GPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_the_Global_Positioning_System)), overseen by the US Air Force, could fail by 2010 is worrying news and whilst TRACKER believes it is highly unlikely that it will happen, it is ready should the system fail.

[SilsoeSid]

But isn't that just my point ap?

Tracker (RBS) get the punter in with these statements, take the money, then have the Police do the job!

[volrider]

When you think about it Tracker have been very astute by supplying equipment for Police and then they sit back wait for the money to roll in and then let the Ploice do their work, very clever bit of marketing :)
Perhaps we should have "vehicle recovery scheme" on the sides of the helicopters:E

[airpolice]

Sid, I am happy with the principle, Tracker is supposed to be a system to locate missing vehicles, not a recovery agency.

My concern is that it has fallen out of use in day to day ops compared with the number of units in use at the launch of the system. Partly this is because there are fewer marked cars out there anyway and partly because some forces are unwilling to spend the money fitting the kit to replacement cars.

Maybe this could go pirvate with a bounty paid by the insurance company, or it may be worth getting units fitted to Local Authority vehicles that are out on the road 24/7.

1,500 is possibly the number of car units that Tracker UK have supplied to the Police, but I'd like to know how many are moving around the force area every day.

Maybe, just maybe, there are enough to do the job. It could be that the original flood was overkill and all that's required is for Tracker to say where (roughly) the car is and a suitable police car attends there.

I don't see the point in more money going around in circles by having the police admin people billing Tracker so thay can pass that cost on to the motoring public.

[volrider]

Tracker is supposed to be a system to locate missing vehicles, not a recovery agency.


But to recover them you have to find them first, we do it for Tracker for free!!

or it may be worth getting units fitted to Local Authority vehicles that are out on the road 24/7.



Ummm problem is they wont have the time to wait around for plod to turn up or wait the obligatory 20 mins for a helicopter to respond:}

[volrider]

Perhaps if we were to allow sponsorship from Tracker and other like companies we could raise the millions they will save in chopping up the present ASU's so service can be kept to a maximum.... or is that too simple?
I fear after watching another episode of Apprentice my faith in management is totally shot, just like most of them should be!!!

[SilsoeSid]

And there we have the solution.

As frontline policing is not being affected by these cuts, perhaps we should have the helicopters 'sponsored' by Tracker/RBS. A simple arrangement where, for example, Tracker pay for the crews helmets. These would also have a 'Tracker' sticker on the back, placed so that it will be seen on all these Stop, You're Nicked, 'Ello3', Action type programmes, that don't seem to pay for any footage!

ap
I don't see the point in more money going around in circles by having the police admin people billing Tracker so thay can pass that cost on to the motoring public.
That's easily remedied.
The units 'aircrew clothing' rep would simply send the bills to Tracker, therefore the only cost would be the one Tracker passes on to the motorist that has a unit fitted to their vehicle. How much gets passed on? Well that would be their own commercial decision.

Tracker gets advertising, the punter keeps the service and the helicopter unit makes savings. :ok:

[Skidkid]

But to recover them you have to find them first, we do it for Tracker for free!!

But isn't it the police's job to recover stolen property? You are recovering the property for the benefit of the rightful owner, not Tracker. Tracker are providing you with equipment to do that, free of charge. Tracker are providing a service to members of the public with no expense to police authorities who should be doing the job anyway.

Should you treat a stolen Tracker equipped vehicle any differently than a non-equipped one?

[volrider]

Tracker are providing a service to members of the public with no expense to police authorities

The members of the public who have Tracker PAY FOR IT.. the members of the public also pay for the helicopter which is then looking for cars for Tracker, if your point is valid maybe everycar should have treacker free of charge??

[Skidkid]

Sorry, I don't see your point.

If I have my non-Tracker equipped car stolen, then see it being driven around and report it to you (I presume you are a police employee). Wouldn't you launch the helicopter anyway?

Can't see the difference.

[Helinut]

Over the years I have been involved in a number of very serious crimes being "resolved" because of Tracker being fitted to vehicles: murders, kidnappings, carjackings, drug pushers and SOCA stuff. And some potential suicides being found.

Should the police pay Tracker for those cases where otherwise a serious crime would have gone unsolved and violent serial criminals not been caught?

Or should we just all be happy to have something else to assist us in preventing and detecting crime?

Using the same sort of argument witnesses should be asking the cops for a fee to make a statement.

[volrider]

Total crap only thing worth while replying to

Or should we just all be happy to have something else to assist us in preventing and detecting crime

I agree but why do Tracker get money out of us doing our job and we get little back in return, a bit of sponsership money would be the best solution then we can spend that on flying more hours like looking for Skidkids Skoda Estelle:}

http://www.vord.net/friends/skoda/skoda6.jpg

Oops too late sorry Skidlid, get tracker next time:ok:

[J.A.F.O.]

I wish we'd fitted Tracker to the original thread and then might be able to locate it and get back to the matter in hand.

[volrider]

JAFO
I think that little can be achieved now on this thread as decisions are beyond normal control hence the divulgence of Tracker

[tigerfish]

hi Guys!

This thread was aimed at the serious topic of Budget Cuts to Police Aviation and the resultant response to the problem by NPAS. It now appears to have drifted off into an entirely different subject concerning the effectiveness of tracker. If we are to make any headway in responding to this challenge we need to remain focussed on the central issues and not drift off.

tigerfish

[volrider]

Tigerfish, agreed but can you tell me what is new to chat about and if anyone is listening? Also it was pointed out that money from firms like Tracker who use our services for their commercial gain should pay the Police hence providing funds to help remove the need for such vicious cuts by NPAS. How was that going off subject?

[PANews]

I disagree totally with the statement....

I think that little can be achieved now on this thread as decisions are beyond normal control hence the divulgence of Tracker

It is pretty clear that these proposals are just that and there is no Business Plan in place and most of it is fluid and pretty rubbish.

I accept that as serving police officers and employees things are difficult - but that is why you do not quote your collar number on Pprune isn't it?

Equally there are people out there who can 'safely' write on your behalf [yes the castigated press even] - and existing documents can be delivered to your local representative/MP to widen the pressure on something has not yet come to pass and has yet to meet the approval of [for instance] the police authorities.

They, those potentially useful people, are not likely to be coming to Pprune any day soon but the words in pprune and other documents can be delivered in plain brown envelopes without fear of discovery for the cost of a second class stamp. The stamp I think you may have to buy yourself.

If these important people only see the ACPO plan in isolation they will never question whether it is good or bad.

[J.A.F.O.]

PANews

I'll give you the money for the stamp next time I see you.

[mickjoebill]

Savings have been quoted as £15M.
What is this as a % of total operating costs?



mickjoebill

[SilsoeSid]

Perhaps we could look at the saving that could be made if Tracker weren't asked to activate tracker units for whatever reason, or BT weren't asked to ping mobiles.
If you think these criminal catching, vehicle recovering, misper finding methods, using commercial companies, are free..... think again !
Why do they need authorisation from senior supervisory rank!

If we are cutting back on helicopters, let's cut back on a device that ties up a lot of resources for just one recovery. Unless of course, money can be generated from a company that wouldn't be able to continue if the police stopped using their kit.

[Skidkid]

.... a company that wouldn't be able to continue if the police stopped using their kit.

Rubbish - Most modern Tracker units have GPS Tracking as well and don't need police vehicles or aircraft to locate them. Police involvement is a nicety and not essential.

.... a device that ties up a lot of resources for just one recovery.

That seems to be a decision for police supervisors or control rooms and nothing do do with Tracker Ltd. Surely, one Tracker equipped car or one Tracker equipped aircraft plus a ground person is not "a lot of resources".

[timex]

Personally I'd rather buy a steering lock than fit Tracker..:ugh:

[SilsoeSid]

Anyone heard the line over the radio or read on the log, 'Standown resources, the Tracker company vehicle has located the stolen vehicle'! :hmm:


A line to get back on thread;
SkidkidSurely, one Tracker equipped car or one Tracker equipped aircraft plus a ground person is not "a lot of resources".

But surely a helicopter is a 'lot of resource', as that is why we are having UK Police helicopter budget cuts :rolleyes:

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

Rubbish - Most modern Tracker units have GPS Tracking as well and don't need police vehicles or aircraft to locate them. Police involvement is a nicety and not essential.


Wrong.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

The basic package which is fitted to most vehicles does not have the GPS function. If it did your right

The GPS function is a bit more expensive and therefore rarely fitted. Now trackstar a different company is a gps function and has a motion sensor fitted so you don't even need to realise your cars gone. Now thats a service.

Having had trackers fitted to several of my cars in the past I would not touch tracker with a barge pole

[Skidkid]

Personally I'd rather buy a steering lock than fit Tracker

Certainly cheaper, I grant you, but it won't stop a determined thief. Joyriders - maybe; a thief after a high value vehicle - no way.

But surely a helicopter is a 'lot of resource'

I'll bet you are the first to be running out to the helicopter if there is a pursuit involved.

The basic package which is fitted to most vehicles does not have the GPS function.

Correct, but there are not many of those sold anymore.

The GPS function is a bit more expensive ...

Correct.

... and therefore rarely fitted.

More rubbish. Tracker Horizon, Tracker Locate and Tracker Plant all have GPS tracking and form the bulk of Tracker sales nowadays.

Now trackstar ........ has a motion sensor fitted so you don't even need to realise your cars gone.

Correct - just the same as Tracker Monitor, Tracker Horizon, Tracker Locate and Tracker Plant!!

Now thats a service.

Now, despite what you think, I don't work for Tracker or even have any shares with them. I just wish that others would check their facts before writing such rubbish.

[huntnhound]

Tracker was rubbish in the end.
It was good when it first came out. In fact BMW had a deal where tracker was fitted to every new vehicle, they thought it such a good idea. Trouble was the dummies that fitted them found out that all the units were fitted in the the same place. ie the inside of the drivers door. Scuzzies took about three minutes to work that one out and then every tiome they stole a BMW they would chuck the device. I spent and hour once tracking a BMW to a garage roof. At the same time they changed their price structure and and so started the downward spiral.
It was common to launch the aircraft several times a day for tracker activations. At the end of my career they were rarer than hens teeth, and after all one has to ask why launch the helicopter to recover one of their vehicles stolen, when others being taken-not tracker fitted- by armed robbery were just as worthy a task? Mind you we hardly had time to look for Trackers as the aircraft was being deployed to school fetes, fly bys, useless box ticking "vunerable" mispers who were usually found in the pub, and intelligence lead patrols..most of which were pacifying the lusts of ill promoted managers so they could look good at the next meeting. More intelligence was soaked up by sitting down with a traffic man and having a cup of tea, than the endless hours sitting in front of useless computer systems ( none of which matched or spoke to each other).
The job hasnt changed for nearly thirty years. The aircraft had the ability to see in the dark and it was , and still is , about finding a burglar in a bush.
Now if the dicks in charge want to change all that, its their toy. But the changes being talked about will not save money, furthermore they wont happen for another ten years. So if your a driver aged 50, go and put the kettle on and make the troops some tea for a change. And if your a bobby with twenty years in, look after the driver. Stop worrying about something that isnt going to happen.
Hnh

[SilsoeSid]

I'll bet you are the first to be running out to the helicopter if there is a pursuit involved.

1. No, that sort of behaviour leads to silly mistakes being made!
2. And just where does Tracker come into this pursuit?


Certainly cheaper, I grant you, but it (steering lock) won't stop a determined thief. Joyriders - maybe; a thief after a high value vehicle - no way.

Only because they will probably have the keys! :ugh:
Anyway, just how does Tracker stop a car being stolen? ;)

[chopper2004]

Judging by how the resources are stretched once NPAS comes into force wonder if its conincidence that AgustaWestland unveiled the AW169 mock up in police colours as well as the PDF brochure over the summer at Farnborough as AW are sepcifically targeting the ASU community.

Therefore IMHO, looking at the 169 specs, could it be concievable that this be the ideal platform to provide the coverage in lieu of the forthcoming changes doing more with less so to speak? For examaple in my neck of the woods being Cambs, and the only air support predicted for 2012 will come from the other side of the Bury Road while if troubles afoot near the Wash then it be the same support.

I'm probably 180 if not 360 degrees from the plain truth with my theory nonetheless its a theory that the propositioning of the 169 around the time when the NPAS is being made more and more official so the AW folks reckon it be the perfect platform to fit tommorrow's UK police needs.

Cheers
Chopper2004

[RotaryWingB2]

Wheels? I thought the operators preferred skids.

I can't see it making a significant dent in the UK Police market.

[PANews]

The 169 promises to be a great platform, the problem is not the wheels [they can be skidded at the drop of a hat] but its size.

For day to day police operations the real need is something the size of a AS355 [AS350 if a single - there are reasons it is so popular] but with the lifting ability and endurance the 355 cannot offer so having a 169 [or 365, 145 etc etc] is just a waste of airframe but the only way to get the ooomph. The problem is there is nothing around that fits the bill, certainly nothing JAR certified so we have the choice of minimalist 902/135/145 [each with added games room space] for the moment unless the eventual 'old technology 109/355' replacement solves the problem years ahead.

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

Skidkid grow up

Now, despite what you think, I don't work for Tracker or even have any shares with them. I just wish that others would check their facts before writing such rubbish.

Fact I have had several cars with second hand fitted trackers and had to have the system current to keep the insurance happy. But they are crap. The thing they don't tell you is it can take up to 24 hrs to activate. Bit late if its out of the country.

Oh and I have also tried to chase a stolen scooby on a tracker. Which having lost sight of it thought I could just just follow the tracker arrow. Wrong..

Wouldn't waste my money:ugh:

[Skidkid]

The thing they don't tell you is it can take up to 24 hrs to activate.

Yet again, as a general statement, complete and utter rubbish!!!!

It is true that if the vehicle is located in a poor signal strength area, such as a lock-up or an underground carpark, it may take a while for the activation signal to penetrate. In an open area, though, it will usually activate in less than ten minutes. I have known several activate in under a minute.

Also, if you've got a second hand one, did you ask Tracker to replace the internal battery?

Which having lost sight of it thought I could just just follow the tracker arrow. Wrong..

Over the years, I estimate that I have searched for nearly 100 Trackers. I have lost only a very few, and usually because we have decided that they are well "off area". There is definitely a 'technique' to locating a Tracker which, maybe, you don't have. Get to the area as quickly as possible but then take it very gently when you get there. Nice and slow, gentle turns, keep a level attitude as long as possible and you won't go wrong.

I am not going to rise to the bait about "growing up". I have.

[20Minuter]

Skidkid

I am with you on this. Tracker UK does a lot of technical work for the Police which is not publicised. I am not going to expand about that here, and I don't work for them either.

The fact that the original thread has degenerated into "lets bash Tracker" or somebody says it all really.

[Retro Coupe]

Savings have been quoted as £15M.
What is this as a % of total operating costs?

MJB
Air Support in England and Wales costs £59.1M/year (source: NPIA/NPAS) with a desire to reduce that to £42M. When you consider the size of the national debt, £59.1M seems like a drop in the ocean. Yes I know a lot of drops can mount up, but considering how much emphasis political parties of all persuasions put on fighting crime, to cut the Air Support budget by 29% is I would suggest too much too soon.:=

In fact NPAS have not visited Colerne at all.


Why doesn't that surprise me? Why would you site one of your assets (which will be doing what 2 aircraft are currently doing) at an airfield 593' amsl. In a former life (non PAOC) I used to operate out of Luton (525' amsl) at some times of the year you could neither get in or out due to fog, which could often take longer to clear than the surrounding and lower lying areas.

[tigerfish]

I really am about to give up! UK Police Aviation is threatened with the greatest challenge to its very existance since the day it was formed, and most useful thing that you can offer is to argue about the relative merits of Tracker! No wonder that you have been back footed. How many PA Chairs have you written to? How many MP's have you lobbied? Don't bother to reply. I can guess!

The concept of NPAS is 100% correct. The devil is in the detail.

What should have been done is this. (1) Create the corporate body. (2) Take over control of all existing ASU's in their current positions. (3) Re -negotiate all existing contracts for Buildings, equipment,Communications, fuel, Insurance, Maintenance, Pilots, support facilities etc on a bulk basis. (4) Run the whole shebang for about 18 months to two years as it is now, so that you know exactly what works and what do's not. (5) And then start to make changes from a position of strength.

If you really do believe that what we had was of any value, for gods sake concentrate your attentions on what is happening and do not go off on pointless arguements about role equipement which may or may not have passed its best.

Ole Grumpy is having real difficulty in believing that many of you are really able to concentrate on the main subject here!

Tigerfish

[SilsoeSid]

There is definitely a 'technique' to locating a Tracker which, maybe, you don't have. Get to the area as quickly as possible but then take it very gently when you get there.

So will this central despatch system authorise the deployment of an aircraft as soon as a Tracker activation is made?

[Senior Pilot]

I initially saw the discussion including Tracker to be relevant, especially when mooted as a possible revenue stream/offset to UK Police funding.

This thread now appears to be on the point of being hijacked, so any further discussion about Tracker will be on another thread. Off topic posts will either be binned or moved :ok:

[SilsoeSid]

tigerfish
I really am about to give up! UK Police Aviation is threatened with the greatest challenge to its very existance since the day it was formed, and most useful thing that you can offer is to argue about the relative merits of Tracker! No wonder that you have been back footed. How many PA Chairs have you written to? How many MP's have you lobbied? Don't bother to reply. I can guess!

Now, I'm sure I read earlier that this was going to happen whatever, even if the Home Secretary has to force it, so what would be the use in writing to MPs etc?

Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!

Maybe HnH is correct, "Stop worrying about something that isnt going to happen", because it seems to me that the ones worrying the most are the ones that want it to happen!

Why this magical red herring date of 2012?
Why do things virtually stay the same until then? Maybe because in reality 'they' know things work well enough as they are, and are living under the spell that after the Olympics the world will be a better place. What if we get the World Cup? Do the dates move?


To save all this faffing around, why don't we just operate a straight no borders policy (that operate fine in some areas already), and employ just one accountant to bill the appropriate force for the service that they have had from a different forces aircraft?
One day force A will support Force B and the next week Force B may have to support force C and then force C will support force A, I'm sure this sort of thing is well within the capabilities of a reasonable accountant type member of staff.
Blimey, I graduated as a rocket scientist (or was it Archbishop?), but needn't have bothered, simply employ a pilot accountant to do it and you can save on floater cover at the same time! And while they're at it, they can keep a record of Tracker recoveries and bill them as well!

[Fly_For_Fun]

Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!

Now, where did I put that bucket of sand?

[Coconutty]

I can't see it making a significant dent in the UK Police market.There isn't a UK Police market any more !


.... the AW folks reckon it be the perfect platform to fit tommorrow's UK police needs.These must be "the AW folks" then :

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/2moroPeeps.jpg

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[PANews]

Well said Tigerfish and thank you Senior Pilot for putting some boot in there and stamping on that diversion.

My earlier suggestion about getting in touch with the people that matter was met with being wholly ignored except for the sad comment about the stamp.

This is [some of] your lives at risk here. If you like what you are doing get writing to those who are ignorant of the situation, PA members, MP's, federation etc because if you do not provide them with the material that may make them pay attention they will follow where NPIA/ACPO lead them. The Police Federation are sitting on the fence leaning towards the bosses side - I know, I asked them - and only you Observers, the serving PF members, have half a chance to turn that around.

UK police air support is - or should be - in a very strong position with its very high profile position in the world of police aviation. Many out there across the waters see the UK operations as being the ones to emulate.

Increasingly a few of us have begun to wonder whether that 'hero worship' is in any way deserved.

From some of the content of this thread it seems not. Do something.:ugh:

[J.A.F.O.]

PANews

Sorry if you misunderstood my comment about paying for the stamp.

[SilsoeSid]

Quote:
Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!
Fly_For_Fun
Now, where did I put that bucket of sand?



Back in your post #668


Fly_For_Fun.....and what of the cost to put this all back in place in a few years with a new government and hierarchy in place..... MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL! :ugh:


I reckon that by not doing anything, you don't force people to dig their heels in defending this, and we may get back to where we were quicker. :ok:

[Coconutty]

Here's a thought :

Does anyone with some amount of clout know how those Home Office / Government Petition things work ?
The ones where interested parties can demonstrate their support on a particular topic such as :

"I DISAGREE WITH THE POLICY TO ENFORCE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF POLICE AIRCRAFT ACROSS THE UK WITHOUT FULL AND PROPER CONSULTATION TO DEMONSTRATE THE EFFECT UPON LOCAL COMMUNITY POLICING, AND AN INDEPENDENT ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF ALL THE COSTS INVOLVED TO FORM A NATIONAL POLICE AIR SUPPORT UNIT, AND WOULD RECOMMEND THAT CURRENT AIR SUPPORT UNITS CONTINUE WORKING TOWARDS BETTER REGIONAL AND CROSS BORDER COLLABORATION AS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE TO SUCH A POLICY.

..... probably not the best wording but you get the idea - perhaps someone far more knowledgable than me could propose something better ?

Such a petition would be open not only to those employed / serving on Air Support Units, but to the thousands of serving Police Officers and staff that the aircraft are there to support ? :ok:

The way I think it works is that people can electronically sign such petitions in support of the topic,
but can't acually vote against it, unless of course a separate petition were started in support of NPAS.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[Fly_For_Fun]

How on earth does resignation of what is occurring constitute a positive reaction. If one says and does nothing, the ill informed, [or not so clever(or "I've got job and am clever so jack attitude rules")] will blunder on into the valley of [expletive], and we are all doomed. That is until the vehicle pursuits go through the roof, people are killed and injured because police cars will be forced to be more aggressive because the helicopter that allows them to back off is no longer available, and all the man hours need for a missing person search go through the roof, where the helicopter did it in a fraction of the time and cost effective too.

Look back 10 years and you will find the reasons air support was invented....and so it will be again, but at what cost? :(

[props stopped]

Cleveland Police Authority chairman wants to replace 70 PC's in a privatisation move. New ten year contract with a private firm to save money. Will air support survive?

More Cleveland Police jobs set to move - Local News - News - Gazette Live (http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2010/11/11/more-cleveland-police-jobs-set-to-move-84229-27640058/)

The writing is on the wall but the same Cleveland Police Authority councillors claimed £200,000 in expenses for the last year alone!
Not bad for sitting around a table drinking tea now and again :confused:

[10DowningSt]

Police Air Support activities costs the taxpayer £66,000,000 per year.

No proper, independent, expert, neutral analysis of the cost effectiveness of that expenditure has ever been carried out, probably simply because no-one wants to know the answer which, it is 98% certain, would say that the same money spent in another way (more officers?) would result in more crime reduction and convictions.

Exactly how many of the airborne pursuits result in a conviction at all, let alone one for something more serious than vehicle and road traffic crime?

One a day? I wonder. More, or fewer?

1,100 more officers, though.....

[Coconutty]

Yet another fantastic example of someone that hasn't got a clue about what they are talking about - spouting meaningless figures. :yuk:

That will be a huge pay rise then :

£66,000,000 a year ( not that this figure is necessarily accurate ) divided by 1100 more Officers = £60,000 salary a year each.
I know a lot of PC Observers that would gladly welcome giving up their jobs for an increase to that kind of salary :ugh:

A salary of £40k is more realistic which would give 1650 more PC's across the UK,
if Air support were scrapped altogether and all of the £66 mil quoted could be utilised.

That's 38 extra PC's per Police force across the UK, covering a 24 hr period which would mean a maximum of around 6 or 7 on duty across the whole force area - to carry all of the work previosuly conducted by the now extinct Air support Unit, and some of which cannot be conducted on the ground :rolleyes:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[huntnhound]

Coconutty, thank you for putting 10 Downing street straight...

10 Downing street, you are obviously a home office employee, which makes you well qualified to talk through your A£$se.Your comments are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.If you wish to load such remarks or take part in this debate you may be better advised to plough through the previous forty odd pages and reach some viable arguement.

And like most politicians sidekicks....your numbers dont add up;)

Hnh

[Fly_For_Fun]

The point is not what it costs but what it saves. 1 road death due to out of control vehicle thief = £1,000,000, Man hours saved during missing person searches incalculable. Simples. Even for you 10downingst.

[SilsoeSid]

Well here's a saving or 2!


Blimping useless! Weather defeats the £80,000 police surveillance balloon


When it was launched a little over a year ago it was seen as another important weapon in the battle against crime.
Costing £80,000, the unmanned surveillance balloon was designed to give police an ‘eye in the sky’ at major events.
But police chiefs have been forced to scrap the balloon – because it can’t cope with British weather.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/11/11/article-1328645-0C0431D8000005DC-524_468x333.jpg

When faced with the high winds and heavy rain for which Manchester is notorious, the 25ft helium-filled balloon had a nasty habit of being blown away or ripping.
It is understood to have been used only 18 times before being scrapped by Greater Manchester Police, which means it cost more than £4,000 per operation.
A police source said: ‘It was absolutely rubbish to be truthful and never worked properly from the day we got it.

‘It was meant to give us an “eye in the sky” at major events where crowd control is an issue. ‘The whole idea was it would save us money because we would not have to use the force helicopter. ‘But it has cost us a lot of money because although the idea was good in theory, in practice it was a disaster. We knew it as the useless blimp.’

Another senior officer said: ‘It was never fit for purpose. On days when we had good weather, it worked absolutely fine.‘But on a day with even a moderate breeze or a downpour, the balloon would be a nightmare, veering here and there until it ripped or got blown away. It was a bit of a joke really.

The blimp had a camera mounted underneath that could swivel 360 degrees and film up to a mile away. Although Mancunians say their city’s reputation for bad weather is undeserved, police found that whenever conditions were windy the balloon was not stable enough for filming to be carried out.

It was hoped the balloon would help the policing of events such as demonstrations, football matches and open-air concerts, and would also be used for covert surveillance. Officers were given training in how to operate the balloon and the cameras.

The force’s top brass are remaining tight-lipped about what events it was used for – but admit it has been a massive letdown.

It has now been sold at a loss but police chiefs said they were unable to confirm the figure.

Chief Superintendent Dave Anthony, of Greater Manchester Police’s specialist operations branch, said: ‘We experienced a number of technical and other problems with the blimp and it was decided, especially in the current climate, that it was neither cost effective nor operationally viable to maintain.
‘We have been able to recycle various parts of the blimp that have been put to operational use while the vehicle itself has been sold.’

Police surveillance blimp scrapped because it can't cope with bad weather | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1328645/Police-surveillance-blimp-scrapped-cope-bad-weather.html)

There are a few classic lines in the comments section of the article :)

[hangnail]

I'm not quite sure what the national issues are that TCTC raises in his Post 692 or who it was in London that ignored his authoritative advice but a quick Google search led me to the following: "The Civil Aviation Authority (Metropolitan Police Service) Directions 2010" which came into force on 29th March 2010.
A quick glance of said Directions would suggest that London has indeed pulled the wool over the eyes of the Home Office, Department of Transport and the CAA -which is no mean feat by a bunch of numpties.
Or am I missing the point that TC is trying to make?
HN

[PANews]

SS

I am still working on this blimp item, if ever there was an advert for a consistent [national] aquisitions policy this seems to be it.

It seems that this is an internal whistle blower job and the 'rag' involved is the Manchester Evening News, lots of twists and turns on this including the purchase price.

The original official GMP quote on price was £800,000 which is consistent with a discount on the manufacturers list price of $1,3M ....you get an HGV to keep it in, that includes a mini control room, the gas bag, gas and sensor pod along with a legth of string..... but then someone at GMP bottled and the quote zoomed down to £80,000.... that is some fairy tale of a discount on the list price for all that gear!

Last I heard was that the MEN was running a story Saturday that brought into doubt another financial quote on the amount GMP raised from selling the bits..... a nice rounded number of £20,000 has been mentioned in some press reports ..... a goodly 25% of the purchase price except that MEN said they have seen the number as £13,000 [less fees?], so we may be down to about 2% of that 'real' price. Still not seen the Saturday MEN article though so not confirmed.

[10DowningSt]

Coconutty

66,000,000 a year ( not that this figure is necessarily accurate ) divided by 1100 more Officers = £60,000 salary a year each.

The figure comes from ACPO. I divided it by £60K on the basis that the total cost of an additional officer is probably in the order of £60K. Since you seem unfamiliar with this kind of calculation, that would include overtime, NIC, Pension and other benefits, and the costs of additional support that the officer's presence and work will generate. I suspect that for an officer earning a basic salary of £40K my figure is on the low side, possibly very much so.

huntnhound

10 Downing street, you are obviously a home office employee,

No, I'm afraid not, just a taxpayer, not a tax consumer.

1 road death due to out of control vehicle thief = £1,000,000,

I'm sorry, there's no polite way of saying....... "Bollox". That's the kind of number plucked from thin air on the basis of "if you are going to tell a fib, make it a good one."

However, I'll retire from this fray; I had hoped to introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.

[Wagging Finger]

Downing Street, Well said. Hopefully your attempt to
introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.
Has not gone unoticed, the POLKA communities website (run by the NPIA)has just had a copy of the first of many NPAS breifing documents uploaded onto it.

It's a secure website and can only be accessed from a .pnn equipped computer. The NPAS team are monitoring it and will answer any questions posed on there apparently.

I don't think that I can put the address on here but I'm sure most of you will be able to find it. If you have any problems, PM me and I'll give you all the details.

WF

[metric]

Hi Guys,

You only have to look at ACPO's guidelines for charging for mutual aid. The document is unclassified and fully disclosable (dated 23 February 2009) and gives mid-point figures for long term costs of employment of an officer (as well as short term assignments).

The figure for the long term employment for a mid-point Constable including employer's pension contribution is £40,033. For completeness the figure for an inspector is £52,830 and that for a Superintendent is £92,651.

I must restate that these are the employer's costs and not what the officers actually receive each month - though we could have an interesting chat on the pension issue!

[Fortyodd2]

I'm sorry, there's no polite way of saying....... "Bollox". That's the kind of number plucked from thin air on the basis of "if you are going to tell a fib, make it a good one."



Actually, the 2008/9 cost to the UK economy of an "Un-natural" death was 1.2M, - (Home Office/NHS figures). I believe, but cannot confirm that the 2009/10 figure is closer to 1.4M.

The "ACPO" cost for Air Support, (2010/11) is 63.5M which they hope and pray will fall to 42M under the National project. (Source: NPIA briefing document dated 12.11.10).

[PANews]

:D
Just to point out that 'things' can be 'done' in relation to the loss and movement of aircraft is a story in today's paper in Bristol... things that are not on Pprune even....

An MP has criticised plans to move a police helicopter that covers the Bristol area from Filton to Wiltshire.

Filton and Bradley Stoke MP Jack Lopresti said taking the helicopter to RAF Colerne could lead to a rise in crime in Bristol. The Tory MP said: "The helicopter is based less than three minutes' flying time from Bristol so it can react to any serious crime in the city." He has now laid down a Parliamentary question on the issue.

OK so its only a pin prick but just a few million more might make a change. I believe that this particular move is the result of pressure from pprune sources.
;)

[10DowningSt]

Actually, the 2008/9 cost to the UK economy of an "Un-natural" death was 1.2M, - (Home Office/NHS figures). I believe, but cannot confirm that the 2009/10 figure is closer to 1.4M.At the risk of drifting the thread, and for that matter the forum, away from its true purpose may I ask why otherwise sentient adults unquestioningly accept and pass on as "fact" financial and statistical numbers without ever looking twice at them and saying to themselves, "That cannot be right; let's see how they worked that out"?

The source of your numbers is the Home Office/NHS. Doesn't that tell you something? Who needs to show that billions of taxpayers funds are being fantastically well spent on emergency response, helicopters, A&E, the whole 9 yards?

Reflect for 10 seconds on the true actual costs incurred with an accidental death. Emergency services involvement is usually fairly short-lived. There may be some hospitalisation costs, care and hotel charges, but by definition these are also short-lived. The state may bear some funeral costs, but usually not. An investigation may well consume a lot of manhours, probably to no great benefit. Are we up to £100K yet, in terms of manpower resources and equipment use? I doubt it.

So where does the £1,400,000 "cost" per accidental death come from?

From all sorts of imaginary and unquantifiable "economic costs", that's where. Any civil servant worth his inex-linked final salary pension can go on finding those until he has reached the figure he was told to reach.

I've done it myself in cost-benefit analyses designed for clients with schemes to promote, such as new airports. It's the assumptions that count, but they are buried out of sight. Such as "let us assume that a businessman's time is worth $257.48 per hour. Or, if necessary to massage the numbers a bit, $416.28 per hour". And so on.

Do you know something? I can produce, using precisely the same techniques with precisely the same basis in fact, figures which would show that the cost of the accident victim not dying are far higher than the costs of his/her death. So if you simply let him/her die, you not only save the cost of the emergency response, you save the huge costs that saving his/her life would incur, over his/her remaining lifespan.

Ridiculous, of course. It would be as absurd a piece of spin as saying that a death costs £1.4m. But that would not stop the manipulators using it, or the gullible believing it. After all, it says "Studies show....." at the beginning.

[timex]

So if you simply let him/her die, you not only save the cost of the emergency response, you save the huge costs that saving his/her life would incur, over his/her remaining lifespan.


That should go down well at the subsequent inquiry! So using your own ideas would that mean we no longer carry out casevac's and Mispers?

[Fly_For_Fun]

And just when I thought 10downingst had pi$$ed off, here he is again spouting from the nether regions.

[props stopped]

There must be loads of money up here in the Northern regions.

The Cleveland Police Authority are now planning to build a new force HQ up the road from the old one by 2013 !!!!

I bet they are going to have their own swimming pool and gym to go with their own parking bays right next to the front door!

Plans unveiled for new Cleveland Police HQ - Local News - News - Gazette Live (http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2010/11/04/plans-unveiled-for-new-cleveland-police-hq-84229-27596281/)

Councillors playing with public money gone mad! :ugh:

[timex]

Authority chairman Councillor Dave McLuckie, says the key to the move will be gaining planning consent for part of the Ladgate Lane site to be used for housing - and then its sale.

He said the move could be afforded because the sale of Ladgate Lane with approval for housing development should generate enough cash to meet the costs of both acquiring the site at Hemlington Grange and constructing the new building.



Just thought you may have forgotten the bit at the end...

[props stopped]

Re; How to pay for the new building. A plan set in jelly I believe.

The ex British Steel site was built on foundary waste material (slag metal) according to HQ staff, which will make it difficult to excavate or build on.

Nobody wants to build at the moment (bit of a recession).

Why would anyone want to buy an old site which has major groundwork problems to add to the cost of building houses which are not being built?

The authority chairmanMcLuckie is well aware of these problems. He is a fan of making large expense claims, and using PFI to fund the latest new police stations in the area. He was the person who shouted from the roof tops about not wanting to amalgamate with Durham and Northumbria a year or so ago. Losing personal power may be be the answer there though?

£10 million for a new HQ is a lot of money to use out of a police budget that is already facing cutbacks. Its only the publics money though isnt it!:mad:
The latest from the Cleveland Police Authority is that they are now considering privatising the SOCO dept and hand it over to the private French firm Steria!! Which is after McLuckie promised not to privatise front line Police jobs!

He's still claiming all his expenses though! The same police authority members claimed £200k in expenses for all the councillors last year :ugh:

Controversial Cleveland Police partnership could be extended to include officer roles (From The Northern Echo) (http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/8629479.Controversial_Cleveland_Police_partnership_could_be_ extended_to_include_officer_roles/)

[tigerfish]

One thing that does worry me is the danger in the interim period of lack of unit maintenance. I am Not talking about aircraft maintenance but everything else.

If you are the chief, and aware that in about 12-18 months you are going to have to hand the whole thing over into the ownership of someone else, how much money are you going to spend between now and then in keeping things going?

Indeed if the machine develops an expensive problem between now & then and its not covered by warranty or other contract, are you going to do it?

I don't know the answer but I bet someone is going to find out pretty soon!

Tigerfish.

[timex]

Now thats a good way of saving money...

Police chiefs pocket 5-figure bonuses when thousands of officers face job loss risk | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329603/Police-chiefs-pocket-5-figure-bonuses-thousands-officers-face-job-loss-risk.html)

[morris1]

10DowningSt


However, I'll retire from this fray; I had hoped to introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.

Im afraid you didnt..!

may I ask why otherwise sentient adults unquestioningly accept and pass on as "fact" financial and statistical numbers without ever looking twice at them and saying to themselves, "That cannot be right; let's see how they worked that out"?

and yet you wrote

Police Air Support activities costs the taxpayer £66,000,000 per year.

Without even casting doubt about the figure, which to use your terminology, is bollox..

33 police units x 2 million pounds each = 66 million.
Do you not find the sums somewhat simplistic..!!

and as for
Exactly how many of the airborne pursuits result in a conviction at all, let alone one for something more serious than vehicle and road traffic crime?

Im afraid this comment alone shows how far removed you are, from knowing what your talking about.

How many "airborne pursuits result in a conviction".. erm nearly all of them..!

How many for more serious than "vehicle and traffic crime" .. What do you define as vehicle crime..?

No insurance ?
No licence ?
Disqualified driver ?
Stolen car ?
Stolen car from a burglary ?
Stolen car from a robbery / car jacking ?

Perhaps you could propose a sliding scale of which of these is serious enough to warrant an aircraft attending.. (oh wait, NPAS are probably going to that.!!)

Im all for balanced debate. But you are confusing Police Work with running a business.
It ISNT the same nor should it ever be.
Savings can be made without chopping the size of the fleet.
Now is not the time when frontline resources are being stretched to remove a massive force multiplier.

[Coconutty]

10 Downing....


Apol's for the late response, been busy dealing with a little lateness myself....

Since you seem unfamiliar with this kind of calculation

Instead of posting such condescending and obnoxious rubbish, why don't you - as you concede your figures are probably wrong, just sod off and get them right, then try again ?

While you're there try working out which currency you're going to use :ugh:
... let us assume that a businessman's time is worth $257.48 per hour

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Further to the earlier post by PANews regarding the use of Colerne, this is from the local rag..

From the Wiltshire Times Website:


Wiltshire's air ambulance will be scrapped and replaced with just one aircraft serving the county, Avon and Somerset and Gloucester under new proposals for a National Police Air Service.

Under the austerity plans, the number of police helicopters and air bases will be slashed by a third across England and Wales.

But, it is claimed the measures will provide a more effective and "joined-up" air service, while simultaneously driving down costs.

It is understood Wiltshire Chief Constable Brian Moore has spoken out against the proposal because of the county's unique joint deal with the NHS to fund the air ambulance.

There are currently 30 police air bases in England and Wales that serve 33 aircraft, costing forces £66 million a year.

Under the plans this will be cut to 20 bases serving 23 aircraft - shaving £15 million off the air support budget.

The plan for Wiltshire would see the combined service based at RAF Colerne.

Rather than each force having its own helicopter patrolling its region, the new national service will be responsible for the whole of England and Wales and be operated from one central command centre.

There will also be a clear "user requirement" laid out, meaning cost-intensive flights will be approved only if they are necessary.

The ground-breaking proposals were put forward today by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), which has been working with the National Policing Improvement Agency.

Acpo president Sir Hugh Orde said: "This project is all about enhancing the service we already have for less money."

The project is already said to have the support of the majority of chief constables across England and Wales and is hoped to be officially rolled out in April 2012.

However, it will be the separate police authorities, who currently own the air bases and aircraft, who decide whether the "borderless" air service goes ahead.

As well as the proposed 23 aircraft - of which the Metropolitan Police will have three - there will be three spare helicopters on standby.

The oldest helicopters of the current fleet will be sold off along with some bases, which have large overhead costs. Acpo believes some jobs will be lost as a result of the overhaul, but said a number of officers would be redeployed.

Hampshire Police Chief Constable Alex Marshall has spearheaded the proposals and will be the head of NPAS.

He said that police helicopters across England and Wales currently offer 19 hours of coverage, but the new set-up would allow 24 hours.

The current response rate - which sees 97 per cent of the population receive air support in 20 minutes - would not be affected.

"There will also be a more specific user requirement focusing on searching for high-risk people who have gone missing, catching criminals who have committed a crime and for surveillance," added Mr Marshall.

"This is not merely a cost saving exercise. While the current service is capable of doing its day job, artificial boundaries have meant that helicopters are restricted to operating within their own force area. A national, borderless service will ensure effective coverage of urban and rural areas."

He added that if the proposals were given the green light and were successful, other aspects of the police service could be nationalised.

Sir Hugh, who represents the 42 police forces in the United Kingdom, said: "What we will get is a slightly enhanced service for less money without taking away from front line policing."

Not all forces have shown support for the National Police Air Service proposals.

South Yorkshire Police, which would have its helicopter withdrawn from service under the plans, claimed that the densely populated city of Sheffield would suffer.

The force's Chief Constable Meredydd Hughes said today: "The plan as presented today does not provide an adequate service to one of Britain's biggest cities, and treats Sheffield very poorly by comparison with Leeds, Bradford, Hull or Manchester.

"The proposal would rely on one of the UK police's busiest helicopters serving Leeds and Bradford to the north, and another currently serving Nottingham and Derby to the south, and there is no doubt that the response to Sheffield would be too slow, and far below the standard of today. The third helicopter proposed is based in Humberside."

Under the plans, aircraft serving the Merseyside, Cambridge and Dyfed-Powys regions would also be scrapped.

Sussex and Surrey would reduce to one aircraft, combine and relocate to a new base at Dunsfold.

Norfolk and Suffolk would also follow suit, relocating to a new base at RAF Honington.

Essex and Dorset's force aircraft would move their bases to Southend and Bournemouth Airport respectively, with aircraft serving West Midlands Police relocating to Wolverhampton Airport to form a two-unit base with West Mercia and Staffordshire.

Chief Constable Hughes added: "The report hides the deficiencies of the proposed service within generalised response times to the force as a whole, but it is the areas of highest crime; densest population; and major sports stadia which receive the poorest service."

The plans would also see aircraft covering Thames Valley, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire withdrawn from service, with provision continuing from other bases in the area.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Here's a follow-up article from the local press...

Wiltshire Air Ambulance vows to fly on alone (http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/8480459.Wiltshire_Air_Ambulance_vows_to_fly_on_alone/)

Wiltshire will continue to have an air ambulance should the police pull out of the shared helicopter, although it would mean a considerable increase in fund-raising, the boss of the air ambulance appeal said this week.

Proposals were announced on Tuesday that would result in the number of police helicopters in England and Wales reduced by a third to save money.

The proposals, by the Association of Chief Police Officers, would mean Wiltshire Police sharing a helicopter with forces in Avon and Somerset and Gloucestershire and for it to be based at RAF Colerne.

David Philpott, chairman of the Wiltshire Air Ambulance Appeal, said yesterday: “My information is that Wiltshire Constabulary will be staying in the contract with GWAS for the next four years and not relocating the helicopter to Colerne and if that is the case the constabulary should be congratulated.

“We have to plan for what I consider is the inevitable which is after 2014 there will be a stand-alone air ambulance for Wiltshire but this gives us plenty of time to gear up our fundraising efforts.”

The running cost of the joint helicopter is £1.3 million a year, with the police paying £800,000 and the Wiltshire Air Ambulance Appeal charity contributing £500,000, which includes paying the wages of the paramedics.

Mr Philpott said a stand-alone air ambulance would cost between £1.5 million to £2 million a year.

He said: “It is a big ask for the people of Wiltshire to increase fund-raising by more than 200 per cent but it’s been done elsewhere. We need to set out the case properly.”

Wiltshire’s police helicopter and air ambulance is one of only three such joint aircraft in the country and is one of only two air ambulances that can fly at night due to the specialist police equipment on board.

ACPO want the changes to take effect in April 2012 but Wiltshire Police’s contract with the Great Western Ambulance Service to operate a joint police helicopter and air ambulance runs until December 2014.

Both the police and GWAS can terminate the contract but need to give 18 months’ notice and pay a financial penalty.

Wiltshire Chief Constable Brian Moore said Wiltshire Police is committed to co-operating on a police/air ambulance helicopter until 2014.

He said: “Thereafter we will have to review what’s going to happen. It is desirable but not essential to have a police helicopter exclusively for our own use, provided that there is adequate air ambulance cover. But we will be looking to spend more money on frontline services designed to keep people safe.”

Dr Richard Riseley-Prichard, who lives in Allington near Devizes and was co-founder of the Wiltshire Air Ambulance Appeal, said: “The joint helicopter has worked brilliantly in every respect and also provides the most cost effective air ambulance in the country.

“I am very sad to think it might finish and rather surprised that the Home Office hasn’t recognised what a cost effective service it is. I can’t believe the air ambulance will die if the police withdraw.

“I’m quite sure that the people of Wiltshire will continue to give donations.”

[PANews]

There are threads within threads in all of this and it is often difficult to work out who is for and who is against. For instance I was not aware that the CC of Wiltshire was a little peeved. That might at least allow the post 2014 air ambulance to use the same current base at headquarters. Assuming that the fund raise is successful - and why shouldn't it be?

There are other air ambulances affected by these proposals - Devon for instance, with accommodation, pilotage and maintenance all locked into D&C Police HQ. - and that will take some chewing over.

You may have read somewhere that Magpas the 'Doctors on helicopters' group up in Cambridgeshire is fundraising around £1M. Of course they fly as air ambulance volunteers on the Cambridge police helicopter as well as East Anglia AA out of Wyton. They will stop flying with the AA in the New Year [replaced by a commercial arrangement based in London] and the police aircraft will probably go in a year or so. Very quietly in the background the CEO of Magpas is David Philpott.... now that is a familiar name.....

Threads within threads....

[500e]

Remind me good or bad PN:ok:

[SilsoeSid]

The Met Police Air Support unit is under threat ? MayorWatch (http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/the-met-police-air-support-unit-is-under-threat/201013342)

London Assembly Member Victoria Borwick is seeking assurances from Boris Johnson that the Metropolitan Police Service’s air support will not be reduced after Government ‘austerity plans’ proposed that the number of police helicopters and air bases be slashed by a third across England and Wales.

What a pity Ms Borwick didn't get to the sentence in the media announcement that says "As well as the proposed 23 aircraft - of which the Metropolitan Police will have three - there will be three spare helicopters on standby."

These decisions are still being debated and I am calling on the Mayor to protect London’s citizens in a cost effective way, otherwise once again London ends up subsidising the rest of the country, when we need this resource immediately available in the capital.


Now if one was Boris, One would feel a 'dead cert' back scratching exercise coming on ;)

[Coconutty]

The man is completely deluded

Of course he is - he is leading the great "austerity plans".

Thesauraus - "Austerity" = the trait of great self-denial :\

How far is it to that 90 degree blind bend at the bottom of the hill you mentioned ?

Methinks a complete 180 would be a better option :ok:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

How many "airborne pursuits result in a conviction".. erm nearly all of them..!


If you want to increase the number of convictions from these blood sucking crims. Lets save a bit of money by getting rid of those useless CPS direct muppets sat at home making stupid decisions. :ok:

Then we may be able to 1 keep air support 2 put more cops on the streets 3 put more scum in jail :ok:

[props stopped]

I've added the latest details on Clevelands privatisation plans in my thread above. post # 882
The Cleveland Police Authority are now even looking into turning the SOCO dept over to a private firm!
They really have lost the plot to save a few bob! :ugh:

[PANews]

We know about South Yorkshire complaining, and I mentioned the other day about the Bristol MP going off on one.... it seems the Bristol Evening Post has picked this storyline up in a big way today. An article and a very pro Editorial in the hard copy and the article in the on-line version.

OK so it may have been a low news day but it is something.

This is Bristol (http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/HELICOPTER-INCREASE-CRIME/article-2915079-detail/article.html)

A FORMER top-ranking police officer responsible for introducing a helicopter to cover the Bristol region has warned of soaring crime rates if it moves from its base at Filton to Wiltshire.

Retired police superintendent Brian Allinson said the outstanding success of police helicopters was based on the speed at which they can respond to incidents as they are happening.

The Filton-based helicopter can fly to the scene of an incident in Bristol within three minutes, but this could stretch to at least 20 minutes if it was moved to RAF Colerne.

The Evening Post revealed earlier this week that Filton and Bradley Stoke MP Jack Lopresti had tabled a question on the issue to the Home Secretary Theresa May because he fears the move would lead to an increase in crime.

Mr Allinson said the proposals to move the helicopter base were typical of the "woolly thinking that bedevils these plans".

He said: "At present, the Western Counties Air Operations Unit covers the counties of Avon and Somerset and Gloucestershire.

"It is based less than three minutes flying time from Bristol because that is where the major crime problem lies. Until the creation of the unit, the area suffered very high levels of vehicle crime, vehicle pursuits and on-street crime such as ram-raiding. The omnipresence of the helicopter within a few minutes has markedly reduced that effect. The proposal to close the unit at Filton and move it to RAF Colerne will have a very serious effect on the aircraft's ability to reach Bristol in an acceptable timescale.

The flying time alone is approaching 20 minutes, leaving nothing at all to allow for communication difficulties and start-up times. I would submit that the proposals will make the aircraft's ability to provide any meaningful service to Bristol almost impossible."

Mr Allinson was responsible for introducing the police helicopter on a part-time basis in 1989 and it became a 24-hour, seven-days-a-week service in 1995. He said: "Our earliest lesson way back in the 1980s confirmed that unless it was possible to have an aircraft overhead the scene of the incident within 20 minutes of its inception, then its ability to have any effect on the incident was markedly reduced. "In other words, if it wasn't possible to get it there quickly, it probably wasn't worth sending it, for the criminal would be long gone."

Mr Allinson, now a self-employed consultant who liaises between the police and the helicopter industry, stressed that he welcomes the setting up of a national police air service. He said the move would lead to cheaper overheads that would make it easier for police forces to pay for helicopters. The helicopter costs more than £1 million a year to run and, according to the latest statistics, deals with more than 3,300 police tasks each year, about 2,200 of which are crime-related.

Mr Allinson warned: "These plans bear nothing of a drive for more efficiency but merely a desire to save money. The fleet is to be reduced from 32 helicopters to 23 and the number of bases from 27 to 20. Not only do these plans remove close-in air supports for the key cities of Bristol, Liverpool, Birmingham and Sheffield, but they leave the jam spread so thinly over the rest of the country that aircraft will always be operating at the limits of their effective range.

"In addition to these major flaws, the plans also place the responsibility of administering the new body with the British Transport Police, an organisation that knows next to nothing about police air support."

Another factor is the notoriously poor weather at RAF Colerne, which would hamper flying, whereas the Filton base has 24-hour landing lights which helps the police helicopter to return to its base in poor conditions. The formation of a national police air service is being led by Alex Marshall, Chief Constable of Hampshire police.

His project leader is Police Superintendent Richard Watson, who said they recognised that helicopters were a very valuable tool in police work. But he said that they needed to be run more efficiently. He said the new service would mean more helicopters were available to cover when incidents occurred. Mr Watson said that a balance had to be achieved in what could be provided in the light of public spending cuts.

A final decision will not be made until next year and after police authorities have been consulted for their views.

[jafo201]

Does anyone else think that the National Police Air Service report is nothing more then a 'sexed up dossier' to justify a flawed idea. Just remember where the last 'sexed up dossier got us.

[Coconutty]

Does anyone else think that .....

YES :hmm:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[PANews]

Plans, oh there are lots of plans... perhas they should do the spade work then build the paper plan about it.... I have a nice 1963 map that proposed 7 helicopters to cover the whole of England and Wales from 7 bases ... came to nothing of course... then the was the 1990 plan dreamed up by a firm of consultants that had over 40 helicopters and fixed wing to cover the same regions.... operating from seven bases .....

Not all of the 1990 S D Scicon recommendations were adopted. The report was considered by the Home Office, ACPO and the Association of County Councils and in January 1993 these published the Police National Air Support Strategy. The Association of Metropolitan Authorities had been invited to be part of the process but they declined on the grounds that they already had their aircraft in place. The strategy set out a funding programme for three financial years, it being intended that the chief police officers could approach the Home Office to bid for these funds.

Wonder where that plan went to?

So they have managed to get to 30+ aircraft - something near the number of aircraft in the plan - and have now decided that it was too many aircraft and that the 1963 plan was nearer the target....

Give it five years and someone with a BSc will decide the number should first number they thought of from one base at Lands End.:confused:

[Digital flight deck]

Can anyone in the know tell me what happens if one or more CC's or police authorities decide that they do not want to play ball? Can the Home Office tell them to or does that mean that NPAS will die a painful and expensive death?

[Coconutty]

... Like South Yorkshire ( for example ? ) - They would proably have to cough up MORE cash into the NPAS pot to keep their own aircraft - but how would that be saving money in the overall scheme of things :ugh:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[Thomas coupling]

Digital: To my knowledge - all the CC's have signed up to it in principal. There is no room for a dissenting CC.

Coconutty - No-one will be able to keep their own a/c post 2012. All assets will fall under the then governing body (NPAS?). They will be national assets. This thing about keeping your own a/c won't exist.

[wright123]

TC, I heard the same, CC's have been told to make it work.

Direct employment is the way to go for pilotage having worked in the enviroment.

It would save a bob or two and they might even pay the pilots more instead of giving it all to the private companies :ok:

[tigerfish]

There can be little doubt now that NPAS is going to happen and I see no future in playing at being King Canute!

What we have to do now is do what we do best! Turn a bad call into a more reasonable end result!

Police Forces have been working with negative budgets for the past five years so most of the flesh had already gone from the bones. It was not surprising then- given our recent lack of attention in pointing out how good we are at crime prevention as well as detection, that we became targets in the recent huge cuts to Police budgets.

There is little doubt that the alternative to NPAS was the loss of several existing air units, - although when push came to shove I'm not sure just how many chiefs would have risked it.

We are now in the position that NPAS will happen. So we now need to make the best of it. ("Note that I didnt say The best of a bad job, because I have always believed that the national route was the correct one.)

We must ensure that the units covering major cities and crime areas are preserved, and that the rural areas are also catered for. The planning should now be more influenced by Air operations PRACTITIONERS and less by theory and range rings.

The most important aspect is to get into place National contracts for Fuel, Insurance and maintenance. To date little thought appears to have been given to making the best of those units that have the best facilities. They are very often the ones that have been chosen to close. How can that be reconciled with making the best use of public money?

The time between now and 1/4/12 should be spent on getting the infrastructure support right. Sorting out the Pilots contracts of direct employment and the communications by which borderless policing can be done properly from day one.

Leave all the bases where they are now! Run the new system as it is for twelve months. Analyse the results, and then take out the lame ducks when you have the evidence to make it clear to all that you know what you are doing.

I am convinced that there are significant savings to be made here. Single contracts for all of the major expenditure heads will save a lot. One PAOC. One centralised training base. Single type fleet etc etc. AND yes there may be one or two aircraft too many but lets prune from a position of strength not just driven by a demand to save money.

I have a feeling in my water that the next few years are going to be bumpy from a public order as well as from a crime viewpoint. The trouble is that when the going gets tough those in command will very quickly forget that it was them that reduced our strength, and just complain that we are not good enough.

So lets start working on getting NPAS better placed and better organised in order to turn potential disaster into a better service.

Tigerfish

[Retro Coupe]

they might even pay the pilots more instead of giving it all to the private companies

I think that unlikely. I'm not sure how long your entitlements remain valid under TUPE, if thats how the transfer to an new employer is going to work, but I would guess that after a finite time they will become negotiable. We may then find ourselves having to accept what we're offered. :* If we don't like it there'll be plenty of pilots out there who will.

[wright123]

Tigerfish,
Best post here yet, you have it in one.
Someone at NPIA/npas should give you the job to sort it all out :D
Wright123

[Thomas coupling]

I see the MD902 production line has been closed by Lynne Tilton for a week. Seems they are running out of money? Writing on the wall?
What now for PAS?

[lynx no more]

Could the corruption trial of RDM NV have caused a cash flow problem or two? Dont shoot the messenger :suspect:

CorpWatch : Pinochet's Dutch Secret (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13937)

[props stopped]

Could be the start of an enquiry into the UK contract dealing perhaps?

CorpWatch : Pinochet's Dutch Secret (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13937)

[morris1]

For what its worth:

I think that there are some units around the UK, that have somewhat sat back on their laurels and allowed the world to move on around them.

By not challenging the likes of PAS, Mac, etc etc, on budgetry matters, and by sticking heads in sand with regards to direct employment for pilots/engineering, they have left the service ripe for a good sha*ting..!
Im sure that massive savings could be made by centralising pilotage and engineering into a home-office owned organisation that provides the service at cost, rather than getting it from a company out to make a profit.

The prices Ive seen charged for provision on both of these, over the last decade have been extortionate to say the least. Surely it would be worth crunching the numbers to see what savings would be made.

If we can stop NPAS quoting these ridiculously generalised figures of 2 million per unit.. !! and do some proper calculations, then we may just keep the level of provision we have now.

Set up a national organisation by all means. But have it provide pilots and engineering first and see what money can be saved before chopping a/c.

If units are then found to be under utilized or unable (or UNWILLING) to provide an effective service compared to the others: make decisions then..!

Sorry to the likes of Macs, PAS and the others, but you made a good profit out the police over the years, cos the cops didnt know otherwise.!.
Times have changed and Police Aviation is growing up (and waking up.!).

Hopefully we can save it before these idiots at NPAS take us back 15yrs.

[SmudgeOne]

Like most things these days when it comes to public bodies the driver is the bottom right hand corner of the balance sheet and not service delivery. Looking at the proposals, yes there will be some winners eg thoseforces that never had the forsight to invest in air support but unfortunately there will be some losers. For losers, read the public and some pilots on contracts with forces. In my old force, Sussex, the proposed move to one asset covering Sussex, Surrey and Hampshire from Dunsfold will save money (loss of 1 heli and the Hants Defender) but the ultimate losers are the public. Lives, including officers', will definately be at risk despite the claim that because all assets now are "borderless" so no real loss to effectiveness. TOTAL CRAP. Sussex hot spot areas are the coastal towns. At night, particularly in the autumn/winter months, anything north of the South Downs is inaccessable due to fog/low cloud whereas south of the hills the weather is different and there is copious ambient lighting. The cost savings in using air assets for manpower intensive tasks such as missing person searches is qualtifiable and as such justifies not less but more helicopters. One up for the short sighted, ill informed buracrats

[props stopped]

Seems the RDM boss Joep van den Nieuwenhuyzen was jailed in the Dutch corruption trial, but is out and doing business again under a new company name. :eek:

Never saw this on PAS website considering he is still their owner?

CorpWatch*:*CorpWatch Bribery Report Helps Spark Dutch Inquiry (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15428)

and the Dutch press cover story here.

DutchNews.nl - Controversial Dutch businessman arrested (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2007/10/controversial_dutch_businessma.php)

Nobody tells us brits anything these days?

[GYROX]

At the risk of setting the cat among the pigeons in this particular thread, I would like to garner some reasonable, considered, opinions as to whether the police could actually achieve these stringent cuts in expenditure whilst maintaining (or even substantially increasing) their aerial search capabilities. This could readily be achieved by adopting fleets of modern (factory produced) Gyroplanes as a (partial) substitute for medium sized Helicopters.

I would maintain that the operational budget required to sustain one medium sized Helicopter would be the equivalent of similarly providing a fleet of perhaps 10 autogyros. By strategically combining a substantial fleet of "observer" Gyros with a (lessened) number of Helicopters that can perhaps serve a number of ajoining police forces, enhanced aerial support can be maintained where the expensive Helicopter assets are primarily reserved for deployment to tasks where the aircraft is required/expected to actually land on scene in order to render further assistance).

When conducting a search over an extensive area surely having 10 "eyes in the sky" is better than using just one. Coordinated sweep searches could be achieved in a much shorter period of time with multiple search aircraft employed simultaneously. Much better to have swept an entire area in, say, 15 minutes with 10 aircraft than in two and a half hours using just one....

Furthermore, maintanance periods could be managed much more smoothly with the overall fleet strength barely uneffected as you lose perhaps only 1/10th of your active resource during maintainance cycles.

The current "best practise" of exclusively adopting the use of a very thirsty and highly complex aircraft that is both highly expensive to buy/lease and to maintain operationally, is surely (perhaps 90% of the time) like using the proverbial "sledge hammer" to crack a nut.

In this instance I would go further to suggest that this particular sledge hammer is even gold plated...

any views?

[Digital flight deck]

Gyrox....what a pile of .......You don't know Barry Jones do you?

[wright123]

Gyrox,
Your funnier than Father Tedd, your not related are you :p

Props,
I always wondered why the flying dutchman PAS chief chap always had a big smile on his face at Helitech!
See how easy it is to go bankrupt and then change a few letters from RDM to Elite, "just like that" as Tommy Cooper would say, and your back in business!! :}

That 'Lynx No More' guy must have known something more than he was telling us on his 'Staverton, MD and PAS' thread after all, and not the 3rd man in the pub as some said?

After reading the press article on the Dutch parent company, it makes you wonder who you actually work for doesn't it! :yuk:

[tigerfish]

You guys are typical of the mess that we are currently in! You just cannot stay focussed on the real problem for two minutes can you?

For heaven's sake just stick to the real thread, and stop trying to lead the subject off into irrelavent areas. The smell of red herrings is becoming nausiating!

Tigerfish

[Thomas coupling]

Chill out Brian - it's all over bar the shouting anyway.
Come the new dawn, brother......

You know what they say...if you can't beat them.....let's see what 2012 brings when NPAS has contracted the whole shebang out to say.......Thales?

[Retro Coupe]

It's probably no coincidence that GYROX rhymes with BOLLOX!

Have we seen you on telly on "Live at the Apollo"? :}

[wright123]

Tigerfish,
I cant agree with you about your pop at Props thread, I think PAS/SAP/RDM or whoever they are calling themselves Today have a lot to do with the way NPAS have appeared on the horizon. Contractors have been getting well paid for not keeping to contracts, such as providing a replacement pilot within 24hrs etc. Double what the pilot actually got paid at my unit.
Those who have also seen the way police pilot contracts have been chosen up north will know THAT it wasn't always the cheapest tender that actually won!
The UEO manager had a say on who he prefered while discussing tenders, which IS a fact.
The fact that the RDM/Elites boss Joep (cant spell the rest) has been in jail for major corruption(bribes) says a lot about the way things are run in his company, like it or not, a change is needed in who contracts are given to in the UK.(No I dont work for the competition)
After reading the press articles about what the RDM boss and his assistants have been upto, I think the brits should bring Inspector Clouseau out of retirement to look at Who got which contracts, and who was actually cheaper when they were obtained on the day here in the UK?
I think as TC has said, most of the shouting is over and what can be said on the buget cuts has been said, but I found the latest RDM/Elite news shocking!
For my money I reckon Gryrox is the PAS HR man, trying to throw us all off the news. :mad:

[Lokon]

TC - I think you will find that they shut down production lines every year for a week during thanks giving and as they dont have any Explorers on the line it wont matter anyway. If you look on some of the other US manufacture sites, you will see they have also stopped for a week, should we worry that Bell etc have also run out of money.

[SilsoeSid]

tigerfish
Leave all the bases where they are now! Run the new system as it is for twelve months. Analyse the results, and then take out the lame ducks when you have the evidence to make it clear to all that you know what you are doing.

Isn't this the most sensible thing said so far!

I say this as one sitting freezing fogged in, listening to all the requests coming in for our support (mostly within 5 mins flying time of base) on our force area. On the other hand, due to servicing commitments we are also giving full cover a neighbouring unit (up until their normal knocking off time), requests so far, one.

The plan is to move us to this neighbouring units location, reducing the reaction time to these jobs, some direct from the officers on scene/behind vehicle, to in excess of 20 mins.

A typical night, apart from the weather, Yes!

Methinks tigerfish's words need listening to before big money is spend, tied in contracts are made, and the point of no return is reached.

[SilsoeSid]

In economics and business decision-making, sunk costs are retrospective (past) costs that have already been incurred and cannot be recovered. Sunk costs are sometimes contrasted with prospective costs, which are future costs that may be incurred or changed if an action is taken. Both retrospective and prospective costs may be either fixed (that is, they are not dependent on the volume of economic activity, however measured) or variable (dependent on volume).

Sunk costs greatly affect decisions, because many humans are loss-averse and thus normally act irrationally when making economic decisions.


Sunk cost dilemma;
The economic approach that sunk costs should not be considered when decisions are being made can lead to a situation where the sum of a number of good decisions can lead to one big disaster.

[SilsoeSid]

Lets say by April 1st 2011 (12 months before NPAS starts up), NPIA set up a central control room, have full borderless ops and see how it goes.

On the closest ac principle; only when we end up with the Wolverhampton ac in Telford, W Mids in Burton, Western Counties in Worcester, South Wales in Bristol, Devon & Exeter in Swansea, Dorset in Honiton, Wiltshire in Weymouth etc etc etc and the 3 Met ac safely tucked up, will we then truly see where the problems lie and realise what a cluster this has the potential to be.

Rumour has it on this thread that all this could be controlled by a BTP controller, with no access to anyones logs, computer systems or any street policing know how, making autonomous deployment descisions to areas that they have never even seen on a map before. Will they also be liasing with the requesting units all over the country? Sometimes it is bad enough one FCC, one helicopter, how will it be with one Control, 43 Police Forces, 23 ac and a shedful of duty Inspectors demanding an aircraft. At what stage after being refused an ac does the Insp call the unit direct and the bun fight starts, especially when he could be told that there is no 'real' reason why the ac can't deploy, but control has decided that it won't?

Our policy is that the ac is there for the officer on the ground and we actively encourage an individual officer to call us on the radio if they need us. Many times flying back to base we get a call from an officer we have just flown over asking for help, many succesful jobs have come of this practise.
Hearing a job cracking off over the air, we can sometimes get onto a pursuit/job before even being able to get through on the radio, how will that be handled in future? Doesn't self deployment go against a central control principle.


It's -6 °C, foggy and I'm getting cabin fever.
Looking at the 250,000 on the wall, makes me realise how naive a plan this is and possibly that some aspects are driven by a different agenda.

New plans for a national police air service (http://www.acpo.police.uk/pressrelease.asp?PR_GUID=%7B4159BF46-892A-4ABA-B06E-8B2909D1353A%7D)

A new National Police Air Service (NPAS) is set to provide a more efficient and accessible air support service throughout England and Wales that offers better value for money.

Responding to the findings of a comprehensive review commissioned in 2009, ACPO members have approved the central recommendation to replace the current air support system with a service organised nationally, but delivered locally.

The government has expressed a commitment to establishing NPAS by April 2012. An ACPO led project team has been supported by the NPIA to develop an implementation plan for this national service.

In difficult financial times, NPAS illustrates how the police service is pro-actively moving towards a national, co-ordinated way of working. The new service will work collaboratively to provide capability from the air that maximises the delivery of frontline public services, but with a lower cost than services procured and managed on a local basis. The proposed model predicts a saving of an estimated £15.27M (22.8%) over current provision.

Head of the NPAS, Chief Constable Alex Marshall said, “This is not merely a cost saving exercise. While the current service is capable of doing its day job, artificial boundaries have meant that helicopters are restricted to operating within their own force area. A national, borderless service will ensure effective coverage of urban and rural areas.

Deputy Chief Constable, Nick Gargan, Acting Chief Executive of the NPIA said, “This will be a truly national policing service that will be at the heart of improving public safety. The NPIA has played a substantial role in helping to set up the service which will bring operational efficiencies and allow for the introduction of innovative contracts that offer better value for money for the service and the tax payer.”

[zorab64]

SS & others would agree, I'm sure, that limiting units to artificial borders makes no sense whatsoever - if there's one police unit that is able to ignore county boundaries with impunity, it's an aircraft. What's so often silly, as has happened in the past, is when comms between a ground unit & a neighbouring force unit/helicopter cannot be made. At least with Airwave that (theoretically) shouldn't happen . . . although for those of us who try regularly, it drops out too :mad: often!

So long as an aircraft can talk to the teams on the ground, the job can be done anywhere - within reasonable range from base :ok:
Those who believe you can arbitarily extend the boundaries of "reasonable" and provide a similar, or (amazingly) better service are seriously deluded IHMO. Likewise, jiggling bases around, to provide over-sized circle coverage, won't provide enough plaster for the cracks - especially if two of those cracks are next to each other . . . that's called a chasm!:ouch:

The lowest common denominator in everything being suggested, apart from the basic range issue, is surely communication. If local control rooms are restricted to going through a central control room to request air support, (makes no difference whether it's BTP or not) there'll be an inbuilt delay, further reducing the effectiveness of an already expanded operating circle.
If, on the other hand, units are contactable direct from their most local control rooms (or officers) on a single appropriate talk-group (which could be still monitored by the central control room), then the most appropriate (closest?) resource can be effectively self deployed. Saves the central control room from getting over-loaded, amongst other problems.
If units are restricted to deploying on the say-so of a central control-room, the whole thing will end up as a complete cluster-f*** :\

Some of us have operated in a borderless fashion for a while. Bits of it work, where units & forces are willing, but effectiveness reduces dramatically, for both "home" and neighbouring forces, when the task is on the end of a 25-30 minute piece of string from base!
For those neighbouring forces who don't have some sort of financial agreement in place, when the prospect of extra cost rears it's head, interest drops off dramatically - the Met cranked up their fees years ago to stop being dragged out of area, & others have followed suit. :ugh:

The National borderless principle could/should work but, as others have suggested, much better to trial the theory ('cos that's all it is) using current bases first, rather than move everyone around at vast expense, only to find that we've ended up with a massive, unweidly, crock of irreversible sh*te!

[SilsoeSid]

Just thinking about the spare ac issue.

The plan that they will be readily available seems flawed.
Where will they be kept, how will they be delivered, and what would be the access/priority criteria. The basic question to be answered is, 'Where does the spare ac come from? Would it possibly come from one of the non 24 hr units? Would we then be looking at the 24hr bases having the ability to be able to hold more than 2 ac at a time, ensuring a 24hr spare ac availiability?

As for forecast servicings, who will co-ordinate the 23 ac servicing to ensure efficient availability of spares ac?

What happens when for example a 24 hr ac goes u/s and the spares are at non 24hr units?


Would there be a monopolies issue if all units were to have the same type or would 100+ pilots have to be rated on up to 3 types?

[zorab64]

SS - don't even go down the "rating pilots on all types" issue. Costs of conversion, and the logistical & financial nightmare of currency, especially if you don't have one or two of the other types in any proximity, would preclude any more than a very few of the total being rated on more than one type, I'd suggest.

I believe the plan is to have one 902 & 2 X 135s as spares - but that is also likely to need either:
a) one maintenance organisation for each type, OR
b) engineering authorisations for pilots from different maintenance organisations.
Either will require a lot of sorting out (as has been mentioned before in this thread) and an impressive bit of management to deliver, store & organise the spares where most needed - if anyone can decide that!!

Of course, with fewer units & no realistic operational overlap, there'll be bigger cracks and even thinner plaster to cover them, in the event of there not being enough spares - which I'd moot will happen sooner, rather than later.

I suppose they could change the maintenance schedule to count transit hours as half the value of on-task hours - then you'd really stretch out time between services!! ;)

[SilsoeSid]

Yet another set of shifts where we have been able to operate normally with the 'future location' being fogged in.

If this is going to happen when the plan is in operation the system loses 2 operational aircraft in one fell swoop, one of which is 24 hr, and access to any spares located there.

Now, after all the money that will have to be spent for the move to happen, if that is both a saving and an increase in operational effectiveness ... I am the brother of a monkeys mum!

[Art of flight]

Just to keep the fire going or at least give it a small poke......The 135 P2+ I fly takes far longer to start than the 135T2+ I also fly, which in turn takes longer than the 135T1 we had. My question is thus, when is a 20 minute circle not a 20 minute circle?

[jayteeto]

Haven't flown a P2 before. Why does it take much longer???

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

So who's going to cough to voting for these muppets in the first place then. :ugh:

Can't wait for the next election when they realise what a balls up has been made and then it will cost a small fortune to get things back to some thing like there were. A good set of professional useful air support units. Not the box tickers they will soon be. :=

[Wagging Finger]

It seems that in the last 48hrs there have been some very worthwhile and pertinent questions posed.

There is a place for informed debate, and it's not here.

If you are part of the genuine UK Police Air Operations Community then have a look at the POLKA (Police OnLine Knowledge Area). It can be linked through the NPIA site.

The NPAS team are on there and will answer any question posed on that forum. If you want to know more you could PM me for more details.

There is an honest and informed debate going on, but here is not the place for it.

Before anyone suggests, I am not NPIA but one day I hope to be part of NPAS.

:=

[Art of flight]

Jayteeto,

The P2 has the Pratt and whitneys which take a lot longer to get to idle, not sure those that decided on the spec of these new aircraft were fully aware of the difference, I don't fly the 902 so not sure if it's an engine or software issue, I just know it's very frustrating sitting there in a police aircraft waiting for the engines to get going when the TM equipped 135 is so much faster to start:ugh:

regards

[SilsoeSid]

There is a place for informed debate, and it's not here.

So how is it then it's taken this long to inform those that actually do the job whether it be piloting, observing, fixing, admin'ing, in charge'ing etc, where to go to find an informed debate about the subject close to their heart? Seems to me that this Pprune thread has more informed debate about the subject than anywhere on the WWW.


NPIA: Online Collaboration - POLKA (http://www.npia.police.uk/en/16173.htm)

What is POLKA;
As an online collaboration area POLKA can provide fast problem solving and access to a vast range of professional expertise, reducing costs and avoiding duplication of effort.

Groups of users, working in communities, can have access and contribute to the development of documents, projects and consultations using a range of technologies such as blogs, wikis, discussion forums, document libraries and shared calendars.

POLKA is protectively marked up to the level of 'RESTRICTED' and appropriate security measures are in place to reflect this. The system has been accredited and is hosted by the NPIA in a secure environment.

POLKA is currently available to those users with a PNN email address and who can connect to the CJX/PNN. By the end of 2010, access will also be available to selected users on the GSI secure government network and identified third parties such as commercial, academic, and charity organisations that the police service does business with.


Always willing to give the benefit of the doubt, so I will be looking forward to all the answers to all the questions !
:zzz:

[jayteeto]

I will cough for giving them my vote. It was all a matter of timing on the cuts........ but they were coming anyway. If we had let the Scottish GordonMoron stay in power, there probably would have been GB PLC bankrupt and we could have ended up with even less!! I saw this coming BEFORE the election and jumped ship from Merseyside. The coalition were not even in power.
Are you really stupid enough to think that a Labour Government would reverse things???????

[SilsoeSid]

Anyone able to put figures on the different start times?
Start to GI
GI to Flight
Flight to ready for skids off.

Then please, Quick Start to ready

More than happy in the order of times, T1-902-P2-T2 :E , but are the differences really that great in the scheme of things?

I would have thought other things such as Hyd/Autopilot/SAS Tests, Nav aid setup, thoroughness of pre take offs, and local factors such as other operators (GA, RAF,ac taxying etc), ATC, camera to cool etc etc would have to come into the 20 minute equation if we are to go this far. Dont forget that the vast areas the aircraft will have to cover under the new system, will now also require more planning.

We can all wack the switches to Flight, abbreviated checks (iaw FLM) do pre take offs (Challenge-Response, I hope) and go, but don't you sometimes get that feeling down the back of your neck just as you're crossing the airfield boundary?

Yes, in the T1 you were off in an instant, (perfect for day ops ;)) but with a more 'equipped' ac comes a penalty.


p.s.
I'd like to see 'informed replies', like this, coming from POLKA :8

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

We can all wack the switches to Flight,

Trouble with that is the engine contracts certainly for the pratts don't allow for quick starts. Infact i'm sure they also don't allow for quick starts,short transits, starts with out a power vamp oh and no excessive hovering. doh :eek:

[Coconutty]

Wagger - Please do not presume to tell me where and when I might like to discuss anything I choose ! :=

By all means publicise alternatives, but considering how long the question of NPAS, and UK Police helicopter budget cuts has been a topic,
I find it quite surprising that none of the members of this forum, who are undoubtedly entitled to access of the NPIA forum you refer to,
have not mentioned it before now.

How many members visiting this forum know of, or have been made aware of the existance of it,
other than by bulk PM's from yourself ?

Seems like a lot of Polka-dots to be joined up.........

POLKA is protectively marked up to the level of 'RESTRICTED' and appropriate security measures are in place to reflect this. The system has been accredited and is hosted by the NPIA in a secure environment.Not Publicy accessible then ..... Remind me again, who is that needs "Protecting and Serving"
and ought therefore not only to be made aware of what is "proposed",
but maybe have a say in it too ?

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[handysnaks]

Trouble with that is the engine contracts certainly for the pratts don't allow for quick starts. Infact i'm sure they also don't allow for quick starts,short transits, starts with out a power vamp oh and no excessive hovering. doh

You're sure, or you think?

[Wagging Finger]

Without getting into arguments over semantics, I have not told anyone where or what to discuss, but it is a useful point. On PPRune there is no such thing as a balanced discussion, several members dominate conversations and refuse to consider and are dismissive of an alternative viewpoint to their own.

If you want to engage in a balanced reasoned debate and have your questions answered by a member of the NPAS team then you have been given the place to go.

If you refuse or are reluctant to engage then you have no grounds for grumbles later, it's a bit like voting in that respect.

Yes, the POLKA communities are only for .pnn equipped members, but surely they are the people who have a vested interest in NPAS.

Pilots and observers, we have a golden opportunity to take part in a debate about the future of NPAS.

And yes the question over who, where and how resources are deployed will be answered on there.

:=

[Senior Pilot]

It seems that in the last 48hrs there have been some very worthwhile and pertinent questions posed.

There is a place for informed debate, and it's not here.

If you are part of the genuine UK Police Air Operations Community then have a look at the POLKA (Police OnLine Knowledge Area). It can be linked through the NPIA site.

The NPAS team are on there and will answer any question posed on that forum. If you want to know more you could PM me for more details.

There is an honest and informed debate going on, but here is not the place for it.

Before anyone suggests, I am not NPIA but one day I hope to be part of NPAS.

:=

In the same way that you extol the virtues of POLKA, maybe you should be more pro active and bring this thread (and its contents) to the attention of the NPAS team?

It is possible that they will learn much more here than they could on a restricted site: and as for informed debate, Rotorheads is obviously achieving just that and has been for quite some time :ok:

[Wagging Finger]

Senior Pilot,
I do know that the NPAS team are fully aware of the content of this site, (despite what has been written here, most of them are from our industry!)

I do know that at the moment the ONLY forum they will engage in is not PPRune, by mere virtue of the fact that is is not restricted.
:=

[Flying Pencil]

Wagging finger, doesn't everyone have a 'vested interest' in NPAS being a success? After all, we're all paying for it.

[Art of flight]

Sid,

I'm with you on most of the things you've listed, my point was that we're now receiving a new generation of aircraft that take substantially longer to get to the point where generated power is available to allow us to get some of the other things on the list underway. So the 20 minute circle with the T2 I fly is greater in radius than the 20 minute circle with the P2 that I fly, as all of the other things on the list are constant from the same base.

Of course we now get back to the old debate of when the 20 minutes starts.:ugh:

[tigerfish]

The problem with the POLKA site is that it is exclusive not inclusive. I have been involved with the development of UK Police Aviation since writing my first paper on the subject at the Police staff college in 1984. The last 15 years of my service were dedicated to helping bring the service up to being one of the best - if not THE best in the world.

But what notice is taken of my experience now? Double zero, naff all, blank! I am retired, so I am expected to sit quietly in a corner drinking my Horlicks. I have no access to POLKA because I have no .pnn E mail address.

Much is made of the famous Report that gave life to the current proposals, but one has to ask "what independance of thought was given to the subject by the author?" It smacks of "Here is the answer, - save £25m, - now go away and come up with a report that does just that" So is it surprising that so many highly experienced practitioners are deeply and seriously worried?

The current system took 25 years to develop into what it is, but it is to be taken apart in about 25 months. Does no one realise that the reality of the situation is, that once you destroy what we have, - and then realise that you have got it wrong, it will take years not months to put it right again!

I have said it before, the concept of a National Police Air Service is the right one, it should have happened years ago. So, bring it on, - Nationalise all of the infrastructure and administration in respect of the service contracts, maintenance, Insurance, staff, fuel, and PAOC etc. But initially leave the units where they are, concentrate on perfecting the communications system, run it as it is, (except for the boundaries etc,) for 12 - 18 months, and then start making the necessary changes to the base locations. To do it as proposed now is sheer folly.

I believe implicitly in the service, and I am totally confident that within our ranks we have the knowledge and the expertise to make the sort of savings that are required, but please, - do it carefully and properly. listen to some of the concerns; for the impression that is currently being given, is that nothing that is being said is believed to have any value at all.

So there is is. - I have no access to POLKA, and so I doubt that they will listen to an old NARPO man after all.

"Wagging Finger", I guess that I am one of the ones that you say, has too much to say. But at least I care!

Tigerfish

[Sulley]

Firstly the civvy observer thing does not save any money.Police officers cannot be made redundant so all the observers currently employed to fly in the aircraft would still be paid.You would then have to pay for a selection procedure for the incoming 'civvy' observers, you'd have to train them,equip them,send them on a national observers course AND pay them so how exactly is that ever cheaper (or better?)
Secondly, if this polka site is so open to discussion, why didn't we have the discussion BEFORE NPIA soon to be NPAS, decided that no one currently envolved with Air Ops knows what they're doing, and they know better.
Does anyone really believe they'll listen now,through this or any forum?

[berty]

Given the rash statements elsewhere in this thread it is of little surprise the NPAS team will not reply here. Apart, from being an open forum of course, where it is hard to tell between the knowledgeable & concerned from the sad & those gradually losing grip on reality. Remember the public sector cuts of 25% - yeah those - I see very little in this thread that actually helps it being achieved - only, oh how unfair it all is.

Well the whole of the police are facing 25% cuts - and other parts of policing are pointing at air support as expensive. Its a matter of survival, and perhaps they aren't so precious about air support as you might like them to be - especially when jobs are on the line. Perhaps we should create a sister site ... the Unprof'l Pilots Rumour Network! Oh for a .pnn address to join a more reasoned debate

People seem unable to separate the aspirations of NPAS (which a lot of people seem to understand & actually agree with) from the infliction of 25% cuts - which would have happened anyway. Go complain to your local investment banker. But in the meantime if we are to help save air support, it would be useful to get this thread into being something useful - rather than being hijacked by a few Victor Meldrew-esque respondents with little to add.

There I've said it. I don't believe it.

[zorab64]

Wright - I don't wish to tear holes in your last post but, IMHO, it's like a colander already. Specifically:

1. Flying unused hours -I'm amazed that you've experienced units that need to "fly off" hours at the end of the year - most of the ones that I know are in the opposite position, they have to restrict their flying rate so as not to overfly the budget.

2. Civvy Obs - If you think you'll get anybody of any quality for £15k, you're quite deluded. You should also have a look at some of the other threads (it's possibly mentioned earlier in this one) where the issue of civvy observers tends to raise hackles amongst the entrenched! I'm not going to waste time repeating my previous opinions here - although I'm generally in favour, if costs/selection are favourable, for a small percentage (only) of unit strength.

3. Fuel Dumps Many units have a number of pre-surveyed HLSs, as well as alternate (licenced) destinations for fuel. I can't agree with your idea for bowsers in fields, as your office wallah will have come into base to start their working day, whereupon they'll spend the rest of the shift driving miles to do each daily fuel check - in itself a job on it's own - every day! Hardly a way to cut down on staff &/or expense. :ugh:

4. Your single Obs idea's all well & good but, if your units are anything like the ones I work with, with more than one force's A2G on the TAC head, as well as the operational TG and a spare, along with ATC X 2, skyshout, downlink, recorder & skyforce, you'll need much more skilled multi-taskers than are currently in this environment (& have to pay twice the rate of a PC for such skills) to make it all work without regular cluster-f**ks at tasks. Yes, it can be done some of the time but, when it's as busy as we find it, it'll all go for a ball of chalk in no time at all - certainly if the pilot doesn't allow him/herself to get sucked into the task details, rather than flying.

Methinks you may work in Sleepy Hollow, trying hard to fly 700 hours a year. Double that rate and you'd find your suggestions would likely fail at the first hurdle, IMHO. :uhoh:

And no, I'm not out to make this fail; I appreciate the needs for financial restraint, caused by the excesses/lack of regulation of the previous Scottish "Fat Controller"; bank greed etc; and did vote for the current incumbents. There are a lot of good points/ideas, but I just don't think the NPAS powers-that-be have thought through it, in enough detail, to provide even a minimum (irreversible) scale of service by enacting the current plans.

[2896]

@wright

I see zorab has already answered you but hey here is my two pennies worth.

My bunch operate with several forces which means the rear observer hasn't got time to twiddle his thumbs instead he is using his knowledge he gained from time on the beat and plans ahead by contacting the surrounding forces direct which is quicker than waiting for the control rooms to short circuit. Mr Offender knows if he changes Police force he most likely gets away because of the slow coms between police forces.

Oh and the front observer is not only doing the camera but he is answering or preparing the radios whilst the rear observer is busy with one talk group whilst having the mapbook out.

The sums don't add up for civilianisation since the civvies have more rules to obey by and are less flexible and considering the role they would be performing puts them into a salary bracket which is either the same as the bobby or even more.
This is fact.

Of course you could pay them as much as the PCSO but then you won't be utilising the aircraft to it's maximum.

You want to save money? Use the aircraft flat out and as I mentioned before the force multiplier of the airborne bobbies who combined have a minimum of 20 years on the beat if not on average of 40years, then you will see big savings in all quarters on the ground.

More HLSs for fuelling could be very useful, though some local populace will be up in arms about being woken at 3 in the morning.
It would help if one could convince the big airports of A not charging a monstrous landing fee and B allow Rotors Running Refuels.
How come the little airfields can offer this service but the professional big aerodromes can't?

You want productive input, ask the observers how they think NPAS should be set up and run and where the savings are, trust me they know after all they only work in this environment day in day out.

[Aerodynamik]

Wright 123, if it weren't for a few one liners in your post indicating to the contrary I would have bet money that you must have no knowledge of ASU Ops.
Yes, a basic back garden search could very easily be carried out by one 15k observer, any one can work a camera. Very much indeed as a 200hr pilot could easily orbit above.
You do the observers a great disservice and I'm afraid are very naive if you believe a police helicopter could operate EFFICIENTLY with just one observer. Just one example are vehicle pursuits. One of the main reasons for our being overhead, certainly in our unit, is to act as Ground Commander and thereby take control and ensure safety. You would have to be a better man than me to be able to do this, work the camera, give a commentary, work the radios and work the map.
The technology has moved on greatly since the days of the Squirrel and even D & C who, I believe, were the last unit to work with one observer have had to accept that, with the new aircraft/kit they need two.
You really cannot compare the USA to the UK. We are worlds apart in nearly every aspect.
Amongst many other things, Police Officer observers can also have there duties changed at short notice, can be kept on duty, can land to detain suspects and probably most importantly can be held accountable for there actions.

[props stopped]

Just read the last post from Aerodynamic who thinks Wright has no experience of ASU ops. I know Wright and he probably has more hours in ASU ops than most readers here.

He's not the only one who has flown single crewed and I agree it wasnt difficult. In fact I would say it was easier. I did the job for over a decade and helped train up most of the cops on our unit. Some couldnt navigate to save their lives but didnt get moved on due to force politics! Others could do the job of 3 observers and didnt blow their own trumpet.

I also think Aerodynamic has missed Wrights points, he wasnt having a dig at the cops, he was suggesting things could be done a lot better if NPAS are now starting with a clean slate.

Cops signed up to patrol the streets not become observers, if someone can do the job just as easily and for less money, give them the job and put the cops back where they are needed seeing as most forces are losing officers due to budget restraints.

As for local knowledge, anybody who joins a unit is giving a thorough briefing on the area and what goes on.

I did notice some of the obs on our unit went from One specialist course to another (traffic), especially when Tenure was in force, which for my money was a good idea. My unit was lucky to turn a blade some days so the new NPAS no boundary system will be like a breath of fresh air up north.

From one pilot to another.

[Sulley]

I wouldn't necessarily go down the american comparison route, remember even the pilot's there are police officers.
Why does everyone keep insisting that removing the police from the aircraft is a cheaper option? - the 15k salary you seem to think they'll (Civvy's) work for is IN ADDITION to the current salaries of the officers that are currently in post.
They don't just disappear the same budget STILL PAYS their salaries plus you have to equip and train the new people AND pay them:ugh:
You also seem to think that the abilities that the observers have as police officers - are never employed whilst in the aircraft! :rolleyes:
yes stick loads of HLS all over the place because that's really going to help :rolleyes:. You'll no doubt obtain them from the same place as NPAS will aquire their FREE i e 10 year old helicopters.(costs anyone?)
THE basic fault with NPAS is you cannot cover the same area to a better degree(in their opinion) with less assets.
The current aircraft do not suddenly become able to fly twice as fast or have fuel tanks twice as big, or the country suddenly shrinks.
If NPAS want to achieve an exercise in moving helicopters about the place then by all means carry on, but someone is going to ask some pretty searching questions when NO ONE IS GETTING CAUGHT! So everyone will still have paid a load of money for Air support - but the results won't be as good.
So how long under those circumstances will forces continue to pay NPAS? And you can cover almost ANY plan these days by throwing in a few 'in the current economic climate' or budget cut this blah blah
As for -'and I have seen us run short and start to select jobs by merit ' what so you just fly all the time then ? maybe if you'd selected jobs by merit in the first place it wouldn't cost so much !!!!:hmm:

[timex]

When the Police are being asked to reduce numbers why would you want to hire Civvy Observers?

How much do you think Civvy Observers get paid, and when the A/C is offline what do they do?

New change to CAP 612 means all landing sites (non-airfield) will have to be re-surveyed and the Surveyors (Pilots) will have to do a course and be trained to use various measuring aids.

[standby standby]

In a recent review in my force it was found that it costs more to employ a civie than it does an police officer in the role of air observer. Add to the fact that generally officers joining ASUs have around 5 years experience of general policing as well as specialist training Firearms, Traffic, Surveillance, Polsa. They bring more to the party than some would give us credit for.

Dont get me wrong there are good and bad, pilots, civies and coppers in aircraft all over the UK right now. The fact is when we looked into it a copper was cheaper than a civie in the role of Air Observer.

As for flying with a single Air Observer, it can be done but only for the easier tasks such as area searches but once you enter the realms of vehicle pursuits, firearms jobs and ANPR tasking, you need two AOs.

But thats only in my 6 years experience in the role.

[SilsoeSid]

A couple of recent paragraphs really show how little people are aware of the job, despite having support from props stopped by saying that they know wright123 in question and that "he probably has more hours in ASU ops than most readers here".


When I did fly single crewed with one observer I found the job went much smoother. I know some will say more eyes in the cab mean safer flying, but as long as the pilot is experienced, I cant see a problem. Done it for years without any safety problems. Lets face it, the pilots are trained to do the flying without anyone to hold their hand.

This clearly shows either a lack of knowledge in how pursuits, for example, are handled by other units or how wright123s unit is really quite ineffectual when getting onto a pursuit.
Single crewed, there is no way the observer can operate the camera, give a commentary, deploy stinger equipped vehicles and other such tactical descisions. When the decamp occurs, how does single crewman give the 'on foot' commentary? Which tower block did they just run into, which road does the pathway they have just ran up come out onto etc? :=
In the very rare occasion that I have been in a single crew situation, it has been told to FCC that we can only provide video for a pursuit and other jobs could be with a reduced efficiency. Any extra is a bonus. :ok:

As for saying 'done it for years, no problems', read - 'got away with it because we bluffed our way and didn't give any form of decent service to those that needed us'! :eek:

Again, by saying, 'I know some will say more eyes in the cab mean safer flying, but as long as the pilot is experienced, I cant see a problem', don't quit know what that has to do with things, besides when we are on a job the crew are each doing their role and wrighty should also realise that even experienced pilots have incidents. :uhoh:

The cop are well paid and should be out on the streets doing what they joined for. Give the job of sitting with a Flir panel on his/her lap to a civvy for £15k a year. The yearly budget for the unit would be cheaper and more cops would be on the streets.

Will that apply then for, firearms, dogs, CTU, SB etc in fact any specialised role, because what wrighty is saying is that all that a police officer should be doing is walking the neighbourhood beat. :mad:

There are a lot of people out there without jobs at the moment who cant join the police force because of job cuts, why not give those people who may be qualified to degree level if thats what you think it needs the job as the civvy operator and get the cops back on the streets as thats why they are so WELL paid. I bet the unemployed civvy's would snap NPAS's hand off for £10k never mind £15k a year.

If there are a lot of people out there without jobs and who can't join the police force because of job cuts, then they won't be able to do the job as there are no jobs to go into :ugh:


If indeed wright123 "has more hours in ASU ops than most readers here", he should realise the importance of the experience that a police officer has and is able to utilise with any situation that the aircraft is called to.

[props stopped]

As usual it comes down to attacking the poster, even if they do know what they are talking about.
Double Crew Myth - The yanks have been doing a good job of chasing people in cars and on foot for longer than the UK, and they do it with one crewman and get their man. Its no different to the jobs in this country, if it really is, tell me how? Do you know we carried out Night casevacs single crewed for years until some of the chaps started to feel left out back at the office!
The majority of ASU jobs are garden searches not pursuits, and its usually a slow process once on scene.
If you dont believe me have a look at the various ASU PUBLIC force websites IF they have one, to see how many pursuits they have attended, and how many are Area Searches with the comment - area dearched and eleminated which are logged?
I know all the jobs arent recorded on those sites and senior officers get the full daily log, but it will give you an idea if you dont believe me.
Single Crew - I've carried out pursuits single crewed and we didnt lose the drivers at the time, its all about command and control and directing the cops on the ground - if they are actually listening to you at the time! The most frustrating part of the job on scene is trying to get cops to listen to your instructions on the correct channel. I've even seen obs press the emergency button to get a word in!
Stingers stop the car nine times out of ten, and the crims know that once the helicopter is getting close they need to dump it quickly.
Our unit was informed years ago that all the prolific crims in the area knew how long it took us to get to a certain area, and they would do their best to dump the car before we arrived, and hey presto it meant yet another garden search IF it had actually been contained by more than one cop.
Dont want to give too much away here, but the cops & robbers TV shows do that anyway.

The cop or civvy who operates the all singing camera these days can flick between map and screen allowing the area to be indentified down to house level, just have a look at the Mets 145 bit of kit and how many screens the chap in the back has, no wonder its too heavy.

Just a few observations while doing the job as the pilot - not an observer.
The cops would be best left on the ground dealing with the crims which they are trained to do, not sat above them which a trained civvy could do :ok:

[doublesix]

Says it all really. Flying the aircraft(as you should), not multitasking. No experience of the workload of an observer just opinions.
Reffering to single observer operations

[Aerodynamik]

Props, no one is being attacked, it is debate from people who DO the job. How would you feel if I suggested that we lower the pilot min requirement to 500 hrs with no mil experience a benefit and offer say 40k. I'm sure there would be plenty of takers who would do a very reasonable job. And what if I were to go into the ins and outs of the benefits here even though I'm not a pilot? I'm sure you would have plenty to say.

I'm afraid your post has so many holes that I really don't have time to address them all but just for example:

The yanks have been doing a good job of chasing people in cars and on foot for longer than the UK.


As you probably know most if not all pilots out there are Cops who have been trained as pilots. Actually come to think of it you are right! Why don't we train the observers to be pilots. What a saving that could be - pilots on coppers wages and lets face it most of our jobs are only back garden searches aren't they?



its all about command and control and directing the cops on the ground


Exactly , and PLEASE believe me, as someone who actually DOES the job (for many years) that you cannot effectively do this single crewed.

just have a look at the Mets 145 bit of kit and how many screens the chap in the back has,


If you actually had any idea of the FULL functionality of that kit you would know that it needs two.

no wonder its too heavy.


Is that so???

[SilsoeSid]

Props stopped;

There is a lot in your last post I could comment on, however, the second to last line says it all.

You might have done single crew blah blah blah and found it no problem, but what did the observer think? Besides, some of us end up with a shedful of various jobs in one sector, including city foot chases, city pursuits and take my word for it, it's a bit of a handful even just to keep the camera on the vehicle, let alone the commentary etc!

Why do you think garden searches are so simple?
What happens when they run?
It's ok for you to sit there circling, but PC Keepingyouhappy, is trying to keep the offender on the camera wishing he knew which road he was running down, what junction is next, which officer is which, where is the dog man and what is his callsign etc.

I think you confuse the Double Crew Myth with the American System Myth;
They may well operate single crewed, I don't know for certain but what I do know though, is that on all of the TV programmes using their footage, I cannot hear a word of commentary or tactical advice to the officers on the ground.
It seems to me that if you want a system similar to the one it appears they use in America, give Mike Smith a ring and use G-PIXX.


I'm just a driver like yourself, however it seems we differ somewhat in that I appreciate the workload of the observers that I work, rest and play with.

[standby standby]

Loving the debate so far, I actually wrote 5 or six paragraphs earlier but I was so angry I had to delete it........

Police officers have spent years on the ground chasing criminals so you would think it a natural progression to put officers in the aircraft that know what going on down there.

It takes 6 to 12 months for an AO to get up to speed, lets halve the AO numbers in the aircraft, double the workload for the one thats left and make him a civie!

:ugh:

You are more than welcome to come work with me for a night conducting a Misper search on the coast involving 2 FCCs, Coast Guard, Ground units, Flir, Skyforce and Nightsun and then tell me .......

oh but the Yanks can do it!!!!

[SilsoeSid]

Just back from the school run and I reckon that I saw wright123 driving the refuse truck at the end of our road.
Sat next to him was propsstopped and I could hear then talking about how easy it was being a bin man, in fact he didn't seem to understand why there was 4 of them putting the wheelie bins on the back when surely one could do the job just as well now that the bins have wheels. :p

[2896]

Well all this goes to show again how little people know outside of the aircraft what is actually involved in being a Police aircraft. Be they Joe Bloggs or Chief Constable. The only solution is to either watch the observers at work or take their word for how it should be run.

I am a driver and after 4 years being on the unit I took the chance of sitting in the back and watch the bobbies at work and let me tell you even after working 4 years alongside those same chaps I was mightily impressed what the bobbies have to put up with and what they achieve.:ok::ok::ok:

My suggestion is to you who think they know, have a sit in the back and watch.

@Silsoe Sid :ok:

[SilsoeSid]

2896
My suggestion is to you who think they know, have a sit in the back and watch.

@Silsoe Sid :ok:


Have I had too much Rioja ?
I thought 2896 and I were saying the same thing. :confused:

Just for info, apart from sitting next to the observer in the front, I do sometimes sit in the back and watch, then fill out a load of forms!

[2896]

It is possibly I who had to much Rioja.:E
How else is one to cope......

[Digital flight deck]

You can never have too much Rioja. :ok:

[Coconutty]

We had some very difficult choices to make, and just like everywhere else,
savings have had to be made - because of the situation we were left in by the previous Government.

We commissioned some very Senior people from the Police Service - including the head of ACPO Air Support
and others with expert knowledge in this field, to come up with a solution
to providing an enhanced and more efficient Air Support service at a reduced cost.

It was genuinely believed that by moving to a National Air Support model
fewer aircraft would be needed to provide the same, if not better service,
while achieving the savings that were needed.

After a year of operating the National Air Support scheme, it has become apparant from analysis of the statistics,
that while some money has been saved in some areas, this has been far less than was forecast,
and the expected efficiency improvements have not materialised.

It was the right thing to do at the time, because until we tried it, we could not be certain that it would work,
and drastic times sometimes call for drastic measures, but it is important that we learn from the process and move forwards,
continuing to examine and identify areas for efficiency improvement and cost savings.


Oh, and please vote for me again at the next election :8

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Just thought I'd help out with a suggestion for a future speech :uhoh:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[Sulley]

coconutty- a potential career in politics becons I believe.:D

(nice to have a back up plan in case someone :mad: up your current job, not that that's at all likely--- :uhoh:)

[wright123]

Silsoe,
Them bins didnt get emptied this week, as I couldnt get into the roads due to all this inclement weather...I did wave by the way, but didnt need props in the cab, as I do it all single crewed, didnt you know :p

As for pursuit commentary which was mentioned, when TPAC is called usually at the start of the merry conga line of traffic and panda cars, your lucky to get a word in these days - unless you get permission off the ground commander of course :ok:

[SilsoeSid]

Aaah, the luxury of motorway pursuits.
Try a bit more urban and it's definitely not a single crew environment.


As it happens, our bins were emptied this morning.
Then again, I guess that you being single crewed having a little problem out of the plain & simple humdrum way of life present itself, meant that you simply couldn't cope ;-)

[timex]

In a serious incident (unless you want a helmet fire) you need 2 observers, all 3 Police radios will be going at once, the rear guy is map reading and the front seat is on the camera. Single Obs can't do that, no matter how good some Obs are.

Night/Day casevacs are done single crew unless we divert while on another job.

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

when TPAC is called usually at the start of the merry conga line of traffic and panda cars, your lucky to get a word in these days

and after all the cuts where the hell are they all going to come from??????
:confused::confused::confused::confused:

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

I've often flown single crewed in poor weather due to staffing problems and some observers not wanting to do overtime with other observers, you know what its like at times.

wright123 are you sure the conversation in the office does not go something like this

boss "does any one want any over time on nights"
obs " who's it with"
boss "wright123"
obs " er no chance hes a right :mad: t"
boss "go on its double time"
obs "have you gone deaf boss"
boss" ah ok then thought I would offer as christmas is coming, but it does not really matter cause he's quite happy to fly single crewed any way. But come to think of it never really seems to get many results when you check easytask to see who's doing all the work mmmm :confused: "

[standby standby]

Not sure how to quote:

'I've often flown single crewed in poor weather due to staffing problems and some observers not wanting to do overtime with other observers, you know what its like at times.'

Sounds like a bit of a CRM nightmare!!

[SilsoeSid]

After a looooong foggy day, and a burning calculator, it would seem that taking flying rates, fuel charges and landing fees into account, at todays prices, it appears that there would be a significant saving if the decision about the 'Midlands Plan' was the other way round !

And that's not including the present plans' additional costs of having to get planning permission, building new secure facilities, extra rent, etc. etc.

[SilsoeSid]

Can someone please tell me what there is 20 minutes away, within the arc NW-S, of the base where 'The Plan' wants to place 2 aircraft?

Then notice what is in the 20 minute circle, if the decision about the 'Midlands Plan' was the other way round !

[RotaryWingB2]

For a maintenance point of view, if NPAS say they are going to provide the same support does this mean the same amount of hours will be flown PA?

If so, then less aircraft = more hours per airframe, which in turn means more regular servicing (400, 800 etc) which in the long run is more expensive (I can't be bothered to do the sums though...), and also means harder worked aircraft, more downtime, and they will need replacing sooner.

But I'm sure this has all been thought out...:confused:

[Sulley]

rotarywingB2-have NPAS actually said at any point how they actually intend to provide anything ? pilots, maintenance observers etc,etc

Sid- or even consider if you put 2 aircraft at the same base they can only possibly have THE SAME 20min circle - so whats the point of that! they've just created a big open area of no cover where you USED to be in order to cover everywhere more effectively :hmm:

[SilsoeSid]

Good point Sulley,
I guess the 120 degree/20 minute 'arc of nothingness' means a lot to some!
Whereas the 360 degree/20minute 'arc of every built up area in the Midlands', means very little!

[SilsoeSid]

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/croppedmap.jpg

The 20 minute rings!

[SilsoeSid]

Yet another day where the weather shows how silly a certain part of 'the plan' is.

I know of a plan that can be implemented tomorrow that saves money in both the short and long terms, while promoting a safer and more operationally effective service for the whole of the Midlands region of the UK.

[SilsoeSid]

Of course, add in the 20 minute circles for other units...

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/map4units.jpg

...and the people around Long Mynd are kept happy, shame about the people in Aberystwyth though!

[RotaryWingB2]

What about the Cheshire aircraft at Hawarden? Or is that moving?

[standby standby]

Has the map with all the 20 min response areas for the whole country been published anywhere?

A picture paints a thousand words..........

[PANews]

...........shame about the people in Aberystwyth.....

just one of so many issues though. On the face of it, if the Dyfed 109 is to go, it would seem more sensible to shift the S&EW aircraft from St Athan to that brand spanking new base to the west.... though that might upset them at St Athan of course as they have a perfectly serviceable base and well placed in the current scene... Rumour has it that the Dyfed base is a tight fit for an A109E so it might not be too friendly anyway. I remember the original base was a tight fit for the Bell 206... and caused problems when the went to the AS355 so it may be spurious humour.

Trying to be dispassionate, if there is to be cover for people in Aberystwyth that move west might just help. Still they only get cover in daylight from their super duper SPIFR machine so perhaps they have already decided an agenda ..... 'air support, what is air support' ....

There are other potential issues of course surrounding the S&EW 135 being uniquely a leased machine.

[Fortyodd2]

"Police Forces individually do not pay VAT. There is potential that national agency would have to pay VAT, which would add 20% to the cost of air support, which would take away all the savings we are achieving. I think we can overcome that but if we cannot we would have to look at a lead force model to avoid the VAT hit".

CC Alex Marshall. Jane's Police Review. 3rd Dec 2010

Don't shoot the messenger.................:ugh:

[Fly_For_Fun]

20 min (always was 15 min so another slight of hand) from your base is all well and good, what if you are not in the North West with all that overlapping cover, like the South East? It could be 40 min (Cromer to Bedford) and a couple of refuels to get to a job and be of some use. Great service....NOT!

[bolkow]

PANEWS, if you are referring to the A109 G-DFFP, then that aircraft is now based at Llanelli and has been for a couple of months now.

[standby standby]

As the response time has extended to the magic number of 20 minutes and some units are going to be flying back and forth from one force to another we need to look at education......

The guys on the ground need to know a number of things, what to do when they call for us, how soon to call us, what a containment is, is a dog coming, you know the usual 100 questions we ask enroute.....

Who is going to do this? At my unit we get the probationers for 4 hours and tell them all of this, then the dog section come to the unit and tell them what they need to know. Those who do the job know how effective Air Support and a dog are together.

And that the point we are Air 'SUPPORT', there to support the guys on the ground.

We have the Police National Search Centre (PNSC), for POLSA, if youre not a copper then these are the guys you see on the news on their hands and knees after a murder or explosion looking for evidence. Everything new goes through PNSC all the latest techniques and incidents, they are the hub. The equivalent roles of UEO Chief Pilot and Training officer are seconded there and disseminate new skills techniques etc to the different Forces.

We need a national Hub for information and education. We all do the same job but we all have different ways of doing it. Those of you who are job or pilots have a pnn email address for the NPIA ASU website but looking at it, we are not sharing information, techniques or procedures.

If WE are going to be covering an area with an extended response time then in order to support the guys on the ground, they and the control room guys need to be educated. We need to share experiences and ideas to provide the best service we can.

As we know from these cuts, some of us posting here may be on the ground waiting for an aircraft in 24 months!

This is the one area we do let ourselves down, hopefully going national, the vast knowledge out there, that is evident on here will begin to flow !

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

sid what happened to north and east mids :ok:

[PANews]

Bolkow,

That is what I was referring to as being further west and of greater use to west Wales than St Athan.

Has anyone noticed the developments with Cambridgeshire and Magpas.... the Agusta 109 HEMS being adopted?

It seems that the EMS world is making its own arrangements to fill the void left by the NPAS 'Marshall Plan' :)

[What Limits]

Silsoe Sid wrote:
I know of a plan that can be implemented tomorrow that saves money in both the short and long terms, while promoting a safer and more operationally effective service for the whole of the Midlands region of the UK.

Be careful what you wish for or you might be looking for a job!

[tigerfish]

Guy's dont get hung up about 15 or 20 minutes. The truth of the matter is what ever way you cut it the response has to be Bl+++y quick!

What most people don't seem to understand is that the clock starts running the moment the incident starts, NOT from when the Helicopter was requested! So if it takes 10 minutes to communicate the task to the unit, then you have lost at least half or even two thirds of that valuable time.

The usefulness of Police Air Support has always been dependant on its speed of arrival on scene. That is precisely why most major cities have until now had their own dedicated air support. - Because that is where the need is greatest. Range rings are at best an indication to the casual and uninvolved bystander, how far the aircraft can travel in 20 minutes. It should never be confused with its "effective " range which is much shorter.

The promotors of this woolly thinking suggest that the service will be better because there will always be an aircraft on call in the region. They conveniently forget to say what good it will be when it gets to you, when the incident started well over an hour ago and in any event the aircraft now needs refueling before it can do anything.

I am told that the whole original concept of air support has changed. The quick curtailment of vehicle pursuit in order to prevent danger to innocent members of the public is no longer a priority. Street crimes such as muggings and domestic burglaries are now unimportant. The purpose of Air Support is now to be top cover for set pieces such as marches, major events and other pre planned incidents. Plus of course counter terrorism. I fully support the latter but the others?

Air support has always been just that, support for the bobby on the beat. It must be as easy to call as the dog or scenes of crime. Thus it has always been, but tomorrow?

Tigerfish

[Senior Pilot]

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/croppedmap.jpg

The 20 minute rings!


SS,

Can you tell us what criteria you used for the 20 minutes, eg time for start up, climb out, what cruise speed?

Thanks,

[zorab64]

Can you tell us what criteria you used for the 20 minutes, eg time for start up, climb out, what cruise speed?

Looking at the maps, SS shows approx 50 mile circles (= 44nm), so a good 20 mins flying @ 120-130kts.

Add 2 mins for start; a couple or 5 for the incident to have filtered through to the unit; possibly a couple more for the agrieved to have picked up the 'phone - and the incident's 30 mins old by the time you arrive at the edge of the circle!

A walking moving target after 20 mins generates a 3 sq mile circle, after 30 it's up to 7 sq miles! And as for vehicles after that time . . . don't get me started! :ugh:

As Tigerfish says, it's not the size of the circle that counts, it's how fast you get to the incident. The proof of the pudding will be found in the communications policy & permissions (as already discussed), and allowing direct comms with the ASU nearest the "requester" - any delay through a central, busy, prioritising, geographically unfamilar, control room will just make things worse. :=

[Senior Pilot]

Looking at the maps, SS shows approx 50 mile circles (= 44nm), so a good 20 mins flying @ 120-130kts.

Add 2 mins for start; a couple or 5 for the incident to have filtered through to the unit; possibly a couple more for the agrieved to have picked up the 'phone - and the incident's 30 mins old by the time you arrive at the edge of the circle!



That was my point: 20 minutes at 132 knots = 44nm, with no allowance for walking out/starting/climb out which would reduce the radius to ~15 minutes at cruise speed, eg 33nm. SS may be selling himself short on his workings?

(Disregarding the delay in receiving the call in the first place: that's a given!)

[Fly_For_Fun]

The point about the 20 min v 15 min is that they lied when they said nothing had changed and the service would remain as is....it did change from 15 min to 20 min. This just shows the thin end of the wedge and the arrogance of those trying to put NPAS in place. They should just be honest with us and the general population.

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

Sid if you look back at your previous posts then it looks like you don't want to co locate the two mids aircraft in the same location because of response times. But NPAS don't seem that bothered about that, So if you move them both to point B then you loose nothing as the whole of the operating area can be covered in less than 20 mins.

Then if you add the north and east mids it actually paints quite an interesting picture and dare I say it you could loose one from the centre!!!!!

[SilsoeSid]

SP;
The rings are 20 mins (40 Nm) flying time from base, after all the admin has taken place, so therefore from skids off.
Is there an exact criteria from NPAS on the 20 mins?

Budgie;
I see where you're coming from and you may well be right, however, all it takes is an ac to go u/s or for a base to be weathered out (a classic week this week!) and all this coverage goes for a ball of chalk if you dont look at a plan allowing for whatifs and known weather trends. If we were post NPAS plan this week, all of the jobs we have attended and all the arrests and found mispers, would not have been achievable due to the base being fogged in and the areas of crime being clear!

Unit bases having a 20 minute circle is all well and good, but if all the areas of crime are at the extremities of these circles, what use is it when you turn up 5 mins too late?

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/map5units.jpg

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/map6units.jpg

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g11/silsoesid/map7units.jpg


Picture if you will, keeping in Sheffield and add in N.Mids, West Yorks etc and doesn't it show how little thought has been done in reference to base locations, areas of crime and topography?

Maybe I should do some 10 minute circles later, building up to a national picture.
If I was at base B, I would be certain to have the time on my hands!;)

[Senior Pilot]

SP;
The rings are 20 mins (40 Nm) flying time from base, after all the admin has taken place, so therefore from skids off.
Is there an exact criteria from NPAS on the 20 mins?

I guess that such an interpretation of 20 minutes is therefore even more distorted if it fails to allow for response time, start time, climb out etc.

The plod on the ground would realistically have to add 10 minutes 'sorting time' for tasking from the (expected) National Control, 5 minutes for getting to the aircraft and getting airborne, then the fabled 20 minute ring giving <40nm unless there is a screaming tailwind. Call it 35 minutes best response time for getting a machine 35-40 nm from base.

That'll work: for the crim :ouch:

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

well that sure will be a great way of saving money. Build in as many blocks to performance we can, a time delay, putting aircraft at poor weather locations, all calls must go through a central point who's phone will bound to be engaged. All adds up to the fact that most jobs will not even be worth doing and therefore a massive saving in the budget and my god will the local communities be up in arms when crimes rockets, drive by shooting increase, joy riding restarts. The list is endless.
There is some good news though. The time wasting pr*cks that phone the police to say "i'm going to kill myself" will get a great service.
:mad:

[jafo201]

Now apply the '20min' circles to the SE region under this 'plan' and then the more realistic real world 10min circles and watch the huge gaps in coverage appear.

Don't include the Met as they are too busy with their local and national commitments.

[SilsoeSid]

Apparently, the 20 mins is widely interpreted as skids off. :ugh:

Looking at the 'future rings, I guess the residents of the quiet little town of Coventry will appreciate the lack of support, being on the extremities of the North, West and East locations.

The number of violent crimes per 1000 population in this postcode district is greater than both the county and national average.
The number of sexual offences per 1000 population in this postcode district is equal to the county average but greater than the national average.
The number of robberies per 1000 population in this postcode district is less than the county average but greater than the national average.
The number of burglaries per 1000 population in this postcode district is greater than both the county and national average.
The number of thefts of motor vehicles per 1000 population in this postcode district is less than the county average but greater than the national average.
The number of thefts from motor vehicles per 1000 population in this postcode district is less than the county average but greater than the national average.
Coventry crime statistics - Find a Property (http://www.findaproperty.com/crimefacts.aspx?edid=00&salerent=0&areaid=1609)

[Retro Coupe]

The figures below were published in a NPAS document last month and show the numbers and percentages of the English and Welsh populus who would benefit (?) from the proposed 20 base national model.

15 mins/ 47,313,741 / 87%
20 mins/ 52,567,518 / 97%
25 mins/ 53,613,972 /98%

If the figures above are correct (?) then the jump from 15 mins to 20 mins represents a greater increase than from 20 to 25 mins. I'm assuming that for this reason the 20 min figure represents the optimum.
These figures are based on 120 knots in the cruise and a 2 min takeoff. Would love to know when the clock starts on the take off time. If it's from when the decision to deploy is made they're barking mad. Especially with a lot of units hangaring their aircraft after every flight for security reasons. But then I guess with the bottomless pit of money that NPAS has access to, they'll be able to up the security at each of the 20 bases to the extent that we can leave our aircraft out more often. :eek:

[Fly_For_Fun]

Silsoe, OK you live in a $hit area. But it is not all about high profile crime and Police Camera Action. Their are the more mundane jobs, a vulnerable missing person for example, surely saving life is somewhere near the top of the police priorities? And in the sleepy East of England this is where the real value of police aviation lies. IMHO.

[SilsoeSid]

Fly for Fun;

I used Coventry as an example, as it will be on the extremities (20-30 minutes away) of 3 different bases. Not bad for a City with greater rates of crime than the national averages. Ditto that for some areas on the Eastern side of Brum!

Their are the more mundane jobs, a vulnerable missing person for example, surely saving life is somewhere near the top of the police priorities?

Well, to you that type of job may well be mundane, however when we are tasked on one it is taken seriously enough not to simply launch into the air. Considerations such as topping up with fuel, map appreciation, talking to people on the phone, ensuring relevant checks have been done, pinging phones etc etc.

Due to the 'planning' required for a mission like that, to make the search more effective, I think the '20 minutes' is purely arbitrary.
Then of course, you should know that! ;)

[Fly_For_Fun]

Ah, yes indeedee. :ok:

[B.U.D.G.I.E]

if you look at the circles then cheshire and North Wales look a bit close and I think they have just had new helicopters too.:ok:

[J.A.F.O.]

Are we just going round in circles?

[20Minuter]

An observation - Apart from PANews encouraging folks to bring the issues to the attention of those that matter, outside of the NPAS team, I have yet to read in detail what folks have done to try to stop all this happening, i.e wrote to this party, met with so and so, challenged thingy and pointed out the flaws.

I know the forum helps with venting ones feeling.

The other thought is, if the NPAS plan was stopped or drastically changed and units were saved from it, is anyone ready for "cuts" that many CC and PA would have to make due to financial cutbacks.

Some units would inevitably close, Hampshire gone already and Wiltshire would probably go too. There would probably be others. Then there would be the reduction in flying hours, Lancs have had theirs cut, Suffolk has been reduce for a while and many others have cuts pending, at least to their current budget, let alone next years. The smaller forces ASU's will be hit the hardest based upon their smaller PA Budget, the larger forces with "loads a money" will probably be OK.

Reduced flying hours will at some stage lead to the loss of posts or jobs. Then there is the flow of regionalisation, only one UEO required here, only one CP there.

Are folks ready for cuts, whichever way NPAS goes? :hmm:

[Thomas coupling]

...........Yes.

[20Minuter]

..............OK

[MightyGem]

Guy's dont get hung up about 15 or 20 minutes.
I wouldn't get too hung up on anything at the moment. It seems that the whole thing is slowly going down the pan, as they realise that more and more of the numbers that they used were utter b******ks.

[tigerfish]

Once again. Do not get hung up on this!

The 15 - 20 minute rule is a EFFECTIVE RANGE issue. It means that after 15 -20 minutes the effective performance of the resource, (in this case the aircraft), becomes markedly reduced. The concept of "skids off" is a total red herring, because once the Criminal has committed the crime,- the clock is running, - or rather he is. If it then takes 10 minutes to deploy the aircraft then you only have 5- 10 minutes to get on task. Those 20 minute range rings are about as effective as a Chocolate fire guard!

That is why the current proposals are so wrong! Why are our major cities, - where the major tasking issues are located, being ignored?

I remain a country bobby at heart, and will always defend the need to provide cover for the rural area's, but even I recognise the need to give rapid support to our city officers, who are increasingly needing our presence.

And I have a feeling in my waters that that last requirement is going to get worse! - & yes, I was serving up north during the miners strike!

Tigerfish

[SilsoeSid]

It seems that the whole thing is slowly going down the pan, as they realise that more and more of the numbers that they used were utter b******ks.

The descision has been made that this will happen and it will. The plan will run its course. I would have thought that if a CC (who would have a lot more on their plate than this) questioned anything at the start, will it would be addressed, however, in the eyes of NPAS, No questions = No problems = Full agreement with the plan.

I understand that as far as NPAS is concerned, if the CC hasn't asked any questions, then it is taken that his force will abide!
Normally this would be fair enough, however perhaps some wool over eyes and smoke/mirrors have been applied. Unfortunately I reckon that when anyone went to find out about Air Support Operations, they chose the locations they went to and asked, very carefully :suspect:

I would like to know, but of course never will, if the CCs were informed of how this plan affects their individual force individually, after research has been done on each individual forces requirements and areas of criminal activity. Wouldn't it be 'not quite right' to give a brief to an urban forces CC based on the operations of a rural unit?
Goodness knows what was told to the CCs before signing up to the agreement! Wasn't it all kept so secret!

I also suspect that not only are some of the numbers b******s, but it may be possible that some may have......oh, what was that saying about statistics again?

[Fly_For_Fun]

SS I think you have hit the nail on the head. Any set of statistics can be spun into saying what ever the author wants them to say, and this is probably the case here. As far as motives are concerned, I could not possibly comment.

[SilsoeSid]

BBC News - Aircraft plan to replace Dyfed-Powys Police helicopter (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-mid-wales-11980904)

But figures suggest while 100% of the force's population can be reached in under 25 minutes under the existing system, only 61% could be reached under the proposed 20-base system.

Officers have requested further detail about costs and say further work must be carried out on financial issues before the plan can be taken further.

61% in under 25 mins!
I wonder how much adding on that extra 5 mins/10 Nm gave!

[Sulley]

Hang on a minute - NPAS have this plan whereby everyone is better off blah blah.
Then when faced with some,to them, not very helpful statistics they reply.....
" In response, the NPAS project team suggested a fixed-wing aircraft could be based in the force area instead"
Isn't that just an admission that their plan was/is a load of :mad: in the first place?

And by the way who pays for said fixed wing? :hmm: