The future of UK SAR post SAR-H

[snaggletooth]

Your thoughts on the best way forward Gentlemen; Sea King LEP, S92/NH90 COMO/COMR, CivSAR...

I'll start the ball rolling.

All that money HMG were going to spend trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear, i.e. Puma2. Instead spend that on the Sea King, Junglie and SAR, to see the venerable old lady through to an OSD of 2020-30. Then the Dark Blue wouldn't be cutting up rough about the Light Blue's Merlins either.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Well seeing as the Big Society means that aircrew and engineers will want to work for free, let's get Ospreys with the money we save!

[Father Jack Hackett]

£300 million for Puma 2 is peanuts compared to what we would have paid for SAR-H. Personally I think we would have been better off paying a wee bit more for new Super Pumas or even Blackhawks but we're too far down the road now so let's get the best value for money for that investment.

Meanwhile, let's forget about poor vfm PFI contracts. Why not cobble together any spare grey Merlins, the ex-Danish Mk 3As and a slack handful of Mk3s to constitute a new SAR Force, manned by whatever combination of RN, RAF and CG/civvy. It sounds like a bit of a b@stard fleet but that shouldn't be too much of an issue when you parcel them out into detached flights. Whatever number of Mk 3s are left over after that can constitute the future CHF. That's a redistribution of assets that we already own with little additional investment to prep the cabs for the SAR role.

Theoretically that still leaves the previously quoted £6 Billion for SAR-H to raid to pay for x-number of new Chinooks to bolster the future RAF SH Force.

If you want to save even more money then delete Army Wildcat. The Pre-SDSR rhetoric was all about dropping so-called Cold War equipment. Why then are we spending £1 Billion on an aircraft that is only good for targetting units of the 3rd Soviet Shock Army as it pours through the Fulda Gap, a job that the Apache can already do perfectly well for itself, thank you very much.

Do we still have GEMS? I'm sure I'm worth a few quid for that little lot....

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Unless Merlin serviceability makes a dramatic improvement, I don't think that the Merlin plan will provide any better availability than we currently get from the Sea King! And surely having aircraft on state is about the most basic requirement for a SAR service...

[Father Jack Hackett]

Investing a few quid in some spares might help! We're entering the twilight years of the Seaking with no replacement on the cards so we need some creative solution, requiring not too much in the way of cash......

[22/7 Master]

Done.

http://www.carsonhelicopters.com/new_developments.htm

You can polish a t u r d.

[Father Jack Hackett]

Well if the cabs have another 10 years or so in them and the up-front investment is substantially less than £10 million a pop for Puma 2 then why not?

[SARfuture]

I have heard the SARF is looking at getting another 7-10 crews in to bolster existing flights then detach crews to the current CG stations. I think the plan is to only cover daylight only until the crews are in place. It would solve some of the military redundancy problems.

[Clearedtoroll]

I'm not sure we need capability upgrades for the Mk3/3a as they are pretty good and safe at what they do. It's reliability that's the problem.

Unless the Carson glass cockpit includes replacing all the front-end avionics (AFCS amps etc) there is not much point. The analogue instruments work fine, it's every other bit of avionics that breaks and keeps the cabs on the ground.

On the mechanical side, Frame 290s that didn't crack would be nice... Perhaps even fix the gear, scrap tail and blade fold, get an electric winch and scrap the utility hydraulics altogether.

But it's basically a good, safe bit of kit.

[22/7 Master]

Carson have replaced the lift frames with stainless steel which has effectively re-lifed the aircraft and allowed an increase in MAUW.

Open architecture and ethernet/databus could save 1000lb of weight (a trial mk4 has reduced by 700lb already).

Summary of Carson Changes:

Latest variant of GE 'gnome' with 1800shp.
Carson MRB and bi-filar.
5 balded tail rotor with Carson TRBs.
Stainless Steel lift frames,
Glass Cockpit.

Result:

ISA + 30 increase of max torque of 85% to 105% (on Ng limit). Could carry twice the pax of a Melrin Mk3 in Afg on summer days.

Potential MAUW increase.

Increase in payload in order of 1000lb+

Cruise 120-140 kts.

[david parry]

Im up for it again;) FROGMEN JUMP TO RESCUE - British Pathe (http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=43912)

[draken55]

David P

Not one of my favourite clips from Pathe News as it includes the awful footage of Commander Russell's accident in 1958. Bad enough to have show this first time but to use it again in 1966 must have caused even more distress to the next of kin.

[snaggletooth]

Forgive my ignorance, but do all marks of Merlin have full night overwater hover capability. Obviously those currently operated by the light-blue have no radar fit so would be more weather limited than a radar-equipped aircraft.

[Father Jack Hackett]

I believe the ex-Danish Mk 3As had a weather radar which we deleted when we took them across. Weather Radar is essentially a bolt-on piece of kit so that shouldn't be a limiting cost.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Weather Radar is essentially a bolt-on piece of kit so that shouldn't be a limiting cost.


Oh no, the radar question rears its ugly head. See you in 6 months...:(

[Father Jack Hackett]

Oh dear, has my amateur aeronautical engineering opened a can of worms?

Go on then, forgive my ignorance and tell us why wx radar would be problematic.

[Sven Sixtoo]

One of the biggest ongoing arguments on other threads in regard to technical aspects of SAR cabs is the limited utility of a weather radar when compared with a 360 degree (or near-360 in the case of the SK) search radar. The argument has been done to death elsewhere. but it won't lie down.

Sven

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

FJH,

I meant no offence to you - my point was just that, as Sven points out, the radar issue has been debated (or should I say argued about) at length in the past and neither camp scored a decisive victory. It is, of course, a significant issue for all-weather SAR helicopters but money will no doubt win the battle against capability...

TOTD

[Father Jack Hackett]

No offence taken mate.

Tucumseh has just PM'd me and back-briefed me on the debate and I am now enlightened!

However, there are many nations using SAR cabs that haven't had a previous life doing ASuW/ASW work and indeed there are some who already use EH 101s so I wonder how much of a reduced capability that represents?

Maybe we could see a mix of ex-grey cabs and ex-green cabs and could deploy the 360 degree radar equipped cabs to the more desolate parts of the country.

Furthermore, we operated for many years with both Wessex and Sea King providing SAR cover so I don't see why we couldn't gradually supplant the Sea King with Merlins over an extended period without having to make a substantial up-front financial commitment while the Nation is still brassic.

[Father Jack Hackett]

BTW,

I'm not a Merlin mate and not a particular fan, but seeing as we're already operating them I think we should take advantage of any potential economies of scale rather than procuring a whole new fleet for SAR whether that be through PFI or outright purchase.

[snaggletooth]

Would any money not be better spent increasing the longevity and reliability of the aircraft already roled, crewed and resourced for SAR, rather than trying to bend the Merlin to that role. The Sea King is well suited to the role but it is suffering reliability issues aplenty. These could be fixed though. So rather than trying to fix a host of issues we could concentrate our efforts in just one area.

[Canadian Break]

I too am not an SAR man, but isn't this debate rather more than a simplistic "what do we already have that can fill the gasp?". Are there not such issues as downdraught - or whatever the technical term is - to be considered? I think there was a case in Afghanistan a couple of years ago when a Chinook was used in an attempt to rescue someone from a minefield and the consequences wqere pretty horrendous due to the downdraught. If I'm wrong on this, then I apologise; I'm not setting out here to upset anyone.

On a simililar issue, I think we are on very dangerous ground if we use the current capability to argue for a new capability. Consider the reduction in the size of the aircraft fleet we have undergone since the current SAR set-up was organised, and then compare the number of call-outs for military rescue v civilian rescue and I believe that the argument will be seen as fundamentally flawed. Perhaps what is needed is a Nationall Rescue Organisation, part of which is manned by the military - the aircrew/groundcrew part could perhaps be the military contribution to the funding - a holistic approach rather than a militarycentric approach may have a better chance of success in the current financial climate.

[Spanish Waltzer]

Merlin (UK variant) - Not designed primarily for SAR. Major rotorwash issues in the hover. Very expensive to operate. Currently abysmal serviceability & spares support. Significant investment required upfront to convert to SAR primary role (& paint it yellow/red/grey:ok:)

SAR SK - Old airframe & despite the good ideas club suggesting it could soldier on for 20 more years...all those in the know (including crab) agree it couldn't without major financial input. That level of investment requires high level MOD budget approval from a MOD who are broke & looking for further cuts & who have openly stated that SAR is no longer considered core MOD business. Not to mention the requirement to renegotiate spares/engineering support with westlands.....how expensive:ooh::eek:

SAR-H may be dead/suspended but there is still a real need to find a replacement airframe. Forget what has gone before. UK is broke & needs to find a solution to UK SAR provision - urgently. Current SK unreliability may get replaced on an interim basis with a cheap to run platform. Not as capable as the SK in its hey day but more reliable & cheaper than current provision.

The who flies it debate is a whole different ball game. Options according to SW are;
1. Mil keep going......may be difficult to justify for same reason as above - MOD no longer see SAR as core business & are trying to find manpower savings.
2. Civ take over completely....similarities to SAR-H contract provision may lead to legal action by ousted bidders/need to put whole thing back out to tender...time consuming etc etc.
3. Mil/Civ mix - similar to old SAR-H intent but perhaps change the ratios...same old arguments as before that led to original decision to remove mil from SAR-H...there's no appetite for it anymore amongst the decision makers.

As always it comes down to money. Are there commercial options out there with the finance to bail the govt out of a difficult problem now & provide a SAR service for the next 10 yrs? If the answer is yes then I see option 2 being pushed through. If the answer is no then I see a MOD footprint being maintained but one that looks significantly different to current RAF/RN provision. New/reduced basing strategy (more civ bases?), 12 hr bases to reduce mil manpower levels, strict controlling guidelines on civ tasking to reduce costs to MOD budget etc etc.

Whatever the outcome only fools with their heads in the sand can be expecting no change over the next 2-3 yrs. The clever ones amongst you will be the ones who are ready to embrace the future rather than wallow in self pity about what has been lost.

[Sexy b**tch]

You do realise that Civ tasking/rescues comes out of the dept of transport budget! Not MOD Budget, can't reduce hours of SAR Flts, politically unacceptable.

Returning to lurk mode.

[Spanish Waltzer]

SB - Glad I caused you to rise from your lurk...albeit briefly & looking at your profile I wont expect any further posts from you for another 2 yrs:ok:

You do realise that Civ tasking/rescues comes out of the dept of transport budget! Not MOD Budget

I'm no budget expert but are you suggesting that mil SAR charge the DoT per civvy rescue? I understand there is a charge for hospital transfers but don't think its as cut & dry as you imply. Does CG SAR charge the MoD if they pick up a serviceman? I accept the DoT budget contributes to UK SAR provision but my point is that with all central budgets being cut I would expect there to be greater scrutiny on tasking to ensure it is essential.

can't reduce hours of SAR Flts, politically unacceptable.


People have said the same thing about closing hospitals....schools.....& just about every other cut this govt has imposed recently.....doesn't mean it don't happen in todays climate. The precedence is already there as SAR-H had already received the green light to do this at 2 mil bases.

Just my thoughts ;)

SW

[snaggletooth]

Does anyone have any idea what's happening? The silence is deafening.

[leopold bloom]

Competitive Contract Notice

1. Title: GB-YEOVIL: The Sea King Project Team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance & Support at its offices in Yeovil
2. Awarding Authority:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, GB


3. Contract Type: SERVICES
4. Description: Helicopters. The Sea King Project team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance and Support to carry out the following tasks at its offices in Yeovil, Somerset.

Life Extension Programme technical assistance and embodiment management.
Sea King Integrated Operational Support re-evaluation.
Bifilar Vibration Absorber technical assistance.
UOR sustainment planning.
Search and Rescue Life Extension Programme study.

Quality Standard Requirement: ISO 9001

5. CPV Codes:
34711500 - Helicopters.

6. NUTS Codes :
UKK23 - Somerset

7. Main Site or Location of Works, Main Place of Delivery or Main Place of Performance: Somerset,
8. Reference Attributed by the Awarding Authority: SKC/0191
9. Estimated Value of Requirement: Category H1: 93K - 685K GBP
10. Deadline for Expression of Interest: 29/03/2011
11. Address to which they must be sent:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, G

In addition to the above I hear that the DFT have initiated informal discussions for a new interim SAR contract to be launched after Easter covering the 4 MCA bases, the requirement could well be "dumbed down". I am sure a clever chap like you can join the dots.:ok:

[Spanish Waltzer]

Leopold

a possible requirement

Integrated Operational Support re-evaluation

UOR sustainment planning

Life Extension Programme study

Tis still early days me thinks. All options being considered.

If you believe others commentators we are about to review the scrapping of Tornado, Nimrod, Sentinel & Ark Royal....love to know where all this money is coming from...then lets talk manpower......

SW

[Evalu8ter]

SW,
Have to agree with you; this smacks of a "buy time not capability" tender to permit our higher ups and political masters to avoid making a decision. There are staff officers probably burning the midnight oil to produce the answer they want to hear - chances are it doesn't exist...

[snaggletooth]

re. the possible requirement, I have a possible winning National Lottery ticket, but you wouldn't bet on it... Would you?

[leopold bloom]

What you haven't taken into account Snags are politics - "The art of the possible".:)

[Biggus]

When does the current contract covering the 4 MCA bases expire?

How fast (not very) is the government contract letting (invitation to tender, time for bidders to tender, examine bids, let contract, etc) process?


What could possibly go wrong... :ugh:

[Sven Sixtoo]

I believe it's 1 Jul 2012 with a 1-yr extension available.

In mid-2013 CHC will have some ex-irish SAR S61s surplus to requirements ...

Sven
never mind aircraft, anyone out there need a SAR pilot?

[Happy Dayz]

From what i gather the latest is that the coastguard bases stay as such with the 92, the Navy bases will go with the RAF taking over them, the Sea King then plods on for a further decade, if this is the case the RAF are going to need to get some extra crews in.

[Tallsar]

I am finding it very hard to believe the RAF will take over at the RN locations. Both their bases are in situ...and ever more so at Prestwick with the demise of the MRA4. Therefore it would seem an inefficient way of maintaining the status quo, unless of course other RAF flights are to downgrade or close, allowing MK3s anrd their crews to be shuffled, and all the MK5s to be scrapped. Interesting times eh?.....As for the Interim....I wonder if all bases will stay or whether Portland will go......

Cheers

[[email protected]]

Nice try Happy Dayz - keep throwing out the chum and someone will bite;)

[Happy Dayz]

:E Fishing, me, never!!