The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

[XV666]

SAR-H seems dead and buried (or at least in the coffin on the way to the funeral), so where now?

Carsonise the SK?

Merlin: suitability/cost?

Keep going as a Mil service?

Civilianise the lot?

Mil/Civ to share?

:confused:

[Vie sans frontieres]

There are only four certainties in life.

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. The cockpit will be awesome
4. The back end will be a bag of sh1te

[PlasticCabDriver]

VSF, you forgot

5. Nurses

[500e]

pcd move to 3 at least
:ok:

[heliwanab]

PCB 5,nurses??what SAR unit you been too lately:rolleyes:
neither mil or civ have nurses on board,just hairy ar$ed rear crew.
no offense :p

[Pennyroyal]

Will the RAF SDSR today reveal or hint to anything?:confused:

[calli]

Parliament today:

Main Chamber:

1430 - Deputy Prime Ministers Questions

Westminster Hall:

11:00am - 12:30pmSir Alan Beith Future provision of helicopters and crew for the Search and Rescue Service
12:30pm - 1:00pmAngus Robertson UK military basing review

Just stole this quote from the military redundancy thread..... will be interesting to see what Sir Alan has to say?

edited to add that you can watch this live or later on Parliament Live TV » home (http://www.parliamentlive.tv) in the Westminster Hall player

[Pennyroyal]

Top gen calli. Thanks:)

[tucumseh]

Type of document: Contract Notice
Country: United Kingdom

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, GB


12. Other Information: Not Provided

[Thomas coupling]

2 year extension on the cards. "Son of Interim SAR" seems to be developing nicely.
I understand the MCA will take full possession of the product in completion?

Q: What is the need/point/purpose of upgrading mothballed seakings to carson/bifilar status - anyone? UK SAR doesn't fly hot or high?????

Lick of paint / Iphone with integral GPS / welded undercarriage - away the lads :eek::ugh:

[P1V1T1]

Lick of paint / Iphone with integral GPS / welded undercarriage - away the lads

Come on the s92 isn't that bad !

[Spanish Waltzer]

Sea King LEP flown by civvy contracted aircrew managed by MCA...:oh:

[sightlesseyes]

As a first time poster but long time reader I am unashamedly self-interested here, but if SW is right and there's an option for civvy aircrew to be trained into winchman/winchop role does anyone have any idea what the pay would be like or how/where/when they'd advertise?

Just wondering, cheers for any replies:cool:

[zalt]

If CHC are postioning a couple of AS332L2 in the Falklands to take over an oil and gas contract from Brintel S-61s, does that mean that there is a ready civil option to free a couple of Sea Kings from there for the UK?

[zalt]

Funny, in Ireland, there are questions from one Minister of State on why they are getting 4 'knackered' S-92's cast off from the Brits!

[pasptoo]

Because they will be better than the totally knackered/obsolete S61s !

ergo: Knackered = less than 2,000hrs total flight time plus upgrades to IrishSAR requirements ?

Wonder how many hours are on the machines you are flying in Zalt?

I'd be surprised if there were any S61s with less than 20,000 hrs let alone 2,000hrs.

P.

[zalt]

Chill - I was joking about them being knackered!

This is what is being said in the Irish Times:

Minister of State for the NewEra energy and utility plan Fergus O’Dowd, who is a former Fine Gael transport spokesman, says he intends to raise the issue of the State’s €500 million contract for search and rescue helicopters with Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar this week.

Mr O’Dowd said there appeared to be “significant questions to answer” over the €500 million deal signed by former transport minister Noel Dempsey last year.

The plan to provide a “new generation” of Sikorsky S-92 helicopters for the Irish Coast Guard from 2012 to 2022 hinged on a contract already agreed in Britain with Soteria to privatise its search and rescue service there.

The contract will involve replacing ageing Sikorsky S-61 helicopters flown by CHC for the Irish Coast Guard with one new and four second-hand Sikorsky S-92 helicopters.

The transfer of the four second-hand Sikorskys, based in Scotland, had been tied into the British privatisation contract timeline. The Department of Transport told The Irish Times this week it had “no reason to believe that the contract will not be fully transitioned by the end of 2013 as allowed for”.

A new Sikorsky S-92A due for delivery to Shannon in December of this year is being built in the US, it has said, and the first milestone payment had been paid as part of the contract terms.

Mr O’Dowd is particularly concerned about the decision not to opt for a fleet of new helicopters, given that the quoted price did not appear to be significantly higher, and he is also focusing on the decision to exclude the Air Corps.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

only one sea king there with the RAF. so how will that help?


Now come on, don't be a dunderhead!

Bring back both Sea Kings from the FI...use these aircraft at one of the bases vacated by the S-92s...that means you only need to drag two Sea Kings out of storage to use at the other S-92 flight, and the S-92 issue is covered...as for the 139s down south, they could be replaced if need be by the ex-Irish S-61s:eek:.

Simples!:ok:

On a slightly less facetious note, bringing back the aircraft from the Falklands would give more fat in the system while the fleet goes through the mooted LEP. But losing two aircraft from the Falkland Islands Air Wing's grand total of 8 would surely require a re-branding...six aircraft is barely a squadron's worth, so how about we just call it the Falklands Air Flight?

[shetlander]

Coastguard helicopter fears
David Ross Highland Correspondent

Share 25 Mar 2011

The union that represents Coastguard staff has warned ministers they must act before the service loses its helicopters.

The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), which represents Government agency staff such as the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), was reacting after it emerged the operator of the UK’s four coastguard helicopters will begin withdrawing the aircraft next year.

However, there are no plans yet to replace them and industry sources warn time is already running out to find alternatives.

The Herald has learned that the CHC Helicopter company is committed to relocating the four helicopters, currently under contract to the Coastguard in the UK, to Ireland.

It is due to start a €500 million (£437m) contract for search-and-rescue services for the Irish Coastguard in July next year that will run for 10 years, with an option for a further three years.

The Canadian company based its tender for the Irish contract on using the four helicopters currently under contract to the MCA. These are based at Stornoway (Lewis) and Sumburgh (Shetland) as well as at Solent and Portland Coastguard stations in England.

Sumburgh will be the first to go in July 2012 and the last Portland in April 2013.

A new private operator had been due to be in place before then. However, the collapse of the £6 billion privatisation of the UK’s search-and-rescue helicopters last month now means there is no new operator contracted to replace CHC.

While the same is true for the two military search-and-rescue helicopter bases in Scotland, HMS Gannet at Prestwick in Ayrshire and RAF Lossiemouth in Moray (still under threat of closure), they can continue in the meantime. However, there is no such option for the Coastguard helicopters.

A CHC spokesman confirmed it was preparing to withdraw the helicopters contracted to the MCA. He said: “CHC continues to service the UK Interim SAR (search-and-rescue) contract until 2012. At the expiration of the UK Interim SAR contract, four S-92A aircraft will move to Ireland to begin service there. This will be a phased project ending in 2013.

“To date there has been no revision or extension of the Interim SAR contract, therefore there is no plan to replace those aircraft in Scotland.”

However, CHC would be keen to talk to the UK Government about continued coverage.

The MCA directed inquiries to the Department for Transport where a spokesman said: “Ministers are now considering their options with regards future search-and-rescue cover and will provide an update in due course.”

One helicopter pilot who has been flying in Scotland for almost 30 years, mostly in a rescue capacity, said he was astonished.

He said: “Everybody just assumed that CHC would carry on. The Government really doesn’t have much time to get this fixed.

“Normally you are talking about a lead-in time of at least 18 months for a new contract like this. There really have to be two-and-a-half crews for each aircraft – one on, one off and one half for leave cover.

“You have got to find these crews, interview them and train them for whatever aircraft that is going to be used.”

Jeremy Gautrey, PCS negotiations officer, said: “The shambolic end to the tendering process that resulted in the Government having to retender has now potentially left the Coastguard service stranded without the guarantee that it will have sufficient helicopters to carry out search-and-rescue operations when the current helicopters retire.

“PCS is calling on the Government to ensure that the Coastguard continues to have at its disposal sufficient helicopters to mount successful search-and-rescue operations until a new contract is signed and in place.”

:rolleyes::E:rolleyes:

[Hummingfrog]

Perhaps all those people who have had a go at Crab may now have to be nice to him if he is involved in recruiting Reserve Aircrew to man the revamped Seakings in Scotland!!:E

HF

[pasptoo]

There really have to be two-and-a-half crews for each aircraft – one on, one off and one half for leave cover

Any takers for working that roster?

[detgnome]

It's all been very quiet recently, some would say too quiet.

DFT depositions to the northern bases. The one who should not be mentioned (allegedly) cleared of any (alleged) wrong doing.

Anyone like to share some informed opinion, or failing that we can just do what we always do and resort to wild speculation....

[detgnome]

BBC News - MPs to take coastguard changes evidence in Stornoway (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-13444700)

I suppose it would seem logical that any decision/announcement regarding rotary assets would be tied in with the results of the MCA review

Keep waiting....

[seniortrooper]

Let's see what the updated Vision 2020 brings pre summer hols eh?

[EESDL]

Sorry - mis-read the title - I thought this was a thread about the future of the post titled ' UK SAR' after the SAR-H fiasco.......

.......like I said, sorry.

[Flounder]

Made and paid for by Eurocopter I'm told but not a bad bit of advertising for Bristow....

Exljdc5xgjQ

[shetlander]

^^ Nice video.

As you said a good bit of advertising for Bristow’s, especially if they are thinking to go in for the interim contract. (Not that i am saying they are, before I get a backlash)

[sightlesseyes]

In the last issue of rotor hub it was mentioned that a decision on the interim was due in Q2, so eyes peeled for autmumn then?

[Spanish Waltzer]

While we wait....well done to all the crew of R104.
Newsroom - Press Releases (http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mcga07-home/newsandpublications/press-releases.htm?id=ECE12C8921C3E8DD&m=6&y=2011)
:D:D:D:D
SW

[[email protected]]

Good job - well done:ok:
:D:D:D:D:D

[Tallsar]

Sly...I think you might find that the Autumn decision is about what to do and how long to take doing I.....not what the solution and contract might be.:ugh:

[TipCap]

Well done Dave and Simon.

I had the pleasure of flying with Dave for nearly 7 years when I was DCP at Lee SAR with the S61N late 80's, early 90's. In my time there, Dave was awarded the CCG's Commendation for Meritorious Service in 1992 too.

I am sure Dave won't mind me mentioning this but he has written a book of his life in SAR "On the Wire" and had it published. If you are interested then PM me and I will let you have the link to the publisher

John Whale



John, I wouldn't have a problem with you posting the link here,

SP

[Tallsar]

Hi.....would appreciate the book link please.

Thanks

[TipCap]

Thanks SP.

For Tallsar and anyone else who is interested, this is the link to Dave's Book :ok: I have checked the link and it works for me but if you have any problems using the link, then PM me.

Bookstore Search Results (http://www.authorhouse.co.uk/Bookstore/BookSearchResults.aspx?Search=On%20The%20Wire)

I have bought the book and am awaiting delivery of it

John Whale

[Tallsar]

Thanks TC ...works well for me...Cheers

[TipCap]

Dave's book arrived today. If you have done SAR, it is worth getting this book :ok:

http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/kernow_lad/onthewire4.jpg

http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv287/kernow_lad/onthewire2.jpg


Best wishes

John Whale

[Ian Corrigible]

Search-and-rescue plans unveiled
The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/searchandrescue-plans-unveiled-2311978.html), Monday, 11 July 2011

Plans to keep search-and-rescue helicopter services going at four key centres were announced by the Government today.

The existing Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) contract is set to expire at bases at Portland in Dorset, Lee-on-Solent in Hampshire and at Shetland and the Isle of Lewis in Scotland.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said today that the Department for Transport would shortly run a competition to procure an interim service at the bases for a period of up to five years.

He added that this contract would be similar to the arrangements currently in place for the bases.

Today's move follows Mr Hammond's announcement in February this year that the Government was halting a £6 billion procurement programme for search-and-rescue helicopters because the preferred bidder had admitted it had access to commercially sensitive information.

Under the privatisation plans, preferred bidder Soteria would have provided US Sikorsky helicopters to fly search-and-rescue missions from 12 bases, including ones operated by the Royal Navy and the RAF.

The Sikorsky aircraft would replace the Sea King helicopters which the Ministry of Defence plans to withdraw from service in 2016.

Mr Hammond said today that the RAF and Navy operations would continue while consideration was given "to the long-term provision of search-and-rescue helicopter capability".

He said he would announce the Government's long-term intentions later in the year.

Meanwhile, the Government is expected to announce shortly that it is watering down plans for big cutbacks in the coastguard service.

Originally, the Government proposed that the number of coastguard centres be reduced from 18 to eight, with only three remaining open 24 hours a day.

But it is believed that the Government will soon say that 11 coastguard stations will be kept on and that all these remaining stations will be 24-hour operational.

Job losses are expected to be fewer than the 250 originally planned.

The original proposals were criticised in a recent report by the House of Commons Transport Committee, which said that evidence it had received during its inquiry into coastguards had raised "serious concerns that safety will be jeopardised if these proposals proceed".

Committee chairman Louise Ellman said the coastguard proposals were "seriously flawed" and there was little support for them. ..........
I/C

[Spanish Waltzer]

Another interesting quote from his statement today...

'The RAF and Royal Navy will continue to provide coverage from their SAR bases as at present, while I consider the options for the long-term provision of SAR helicopter capability.

'I will inform the House later in the year of the government’s intentions for the longer term. The procurement strategy we adopt for the longer term will seek to ensure that the Ministry of Defence is able to complete its previously announced intention to withdraw its Sea Kings from service in 2016.'


...implies that whatever the longer term strategy might be there wont be a huge lead in time to get a full civilian service up & running by 2016.

Is acquiring new airframes in the numbers needed in that sort of timescale realistic?

Is acquiring suitably trained crews in the numbers needed in that sort of timescale realistic also?

As I understood it the Soteria transition was phased for these reasons & should have started about now in order to allow for the Sea King's demise in 2016. It will be an interesting bit of procurement & project management to replicate that in a significantly shorter timescale whether or not the longer term contract is for 5, 10 or 25 yrs.

More interesting times ahead :hmm:

[Tallsar]

Here we go again then.......:ugh::confused
I think you are right SW....there seems little time from one contract to another. Looks like the IPT will be busy......
As for the Soteria transition period....I think that was more lengthy than really neccessary driven by HMG rather than what was thought possible...so maybe there is room for some compacting....and of course under the original plan, Mil SAR SK wasn't to finally go from the last few Flts until 2017.....so any winning bidder is going to have to step lightly to get it all to work!

Where's Crab when you need him? :)

[Sven Sixtoo]

No idea where Crab is, but if you need a SAR pilot, or a bloke who worked on the Cyprus COMR bids, the interim CG SAR contract and SAR-H itself, I'm still available. (though Tallsar could also no doubt claim at least 4 out of those 5!)

Iain
still needing a job!

[3D CAM]

still needing a job!

You and one or two others.:hmm:

3D

[Tallsar]

Iain dear old chap...i hope you dont count your rounds in the way you count your previous jobs! I dont think my sight and mathematics are failing me...but surely there are only 4.....so maybe it was only 3 out of 4 you meant...I am begining to think UK SAR procurement is becoming like the proposed badger cull.....we all know we need it....but hey lets hope its not 12 years before we see some action.....oops....its already 10!:ugh::rolleyes::)

[3D CAM]

Sven.

Quote..
but if you need a SAR pilot, or a bloke who worked on the Cyprus COMR bids, the interim CG SAR contract and SAR-H itself, I'm still available.

Is'nt that why we are in this situation now.:confused:

Or was that comment tongue in cheek?? I do hope so.:)

3D

[rotor-rooter]

Have any criminal charges or sanctions been applied to the companies and individuals involved in this abhorrent fiasco that occurred during the SAR-H bid process? It appears that an obscene amount of both tax-payers, and competing bidders, money was lost in an apparent bid fixing conspiracy of a scale and standard more typically found in corrupt third world dictatorships, rather than the UK.

It would certainly make me feel much better to know that the guilty are being investigated and that appropriate action is being taken to remedy the original faults and ensure a fair bid for the next phase.

Is there an investigation actually occurring at this time?

Is there jail time in anyone's future? :eek:

[Oneclub]

Looking forward rather than backwards, what would be the chances of doing something 'joint' with the Irish here? The SAR helicopters of both countries are always in and out of each others Search and Rescue Regions anyway.

[Max Contingency]

Not sure that would work out with the irish having just let a 10 year contract. I think the politics of having two government departments involved are massive, let alone having two countries involved. But then again, if we are going to put British fast jet pilots onto French aircraft carriers I guess anything is possible!!!

[500 Fan]

If the UK Government wants to pick up the tab on the Irish contract for a year or two, I'm sure the so-called Irish Government would be happy to have the new Sikorskys based in the UK for a while. It would save us a lot of money, and given the way they are shutting down hospitals here at the moment, a lack of SAR cover in Ireland wouldn't be too much of a concern to them. If only we hadn't sold the Alouette IIIs so quickly. :E

500 Fan.

[Thomas coupling]

Crabs working for a living down the FI.

House of Commons - Hansard - 11th July 2011:


Search and Rescue Interim Contract
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Philip Hammond): On 8 February I informed the House that, owing to irregularities in the bidding process, the Government had concluded that it was not appropriate to proceed with the previously planned joint MOD/DFT PFI procurement for future search and rescue capability.

The investigation into the circumstances that led to the cancellation of that procurement is ongoing. Work is also under way to identify the optimum procurement options for the long-term provision of search and rescue helicopter capability for the UK. However, as the existing Maritime and Coastguard Agency search and rescue helicopter contract that provides services at Portland, Lee on Solent, Shetland and the Isle of Lewis is set to expire, I wish to inform the House of my plans to ensure that search and rescue helicopter services from these locations continue uninterrupted until new long-term arrangements are in place.

To ensure the continuity of services from these locations, the Department for Transport will shortly run a competition to procure an interim service for a period of up to five years. This contract will be similar to the arrangements that are currently in place for these bases and are working well. The contract will be open to all interested bidders able to offer a service that fully meets our requirements and ensures the safety of the public and seafarers.

These arrangements will ensure that search and rescue helicopter services are maintained while the range of options in relation to the long-term future provision of such services are being fully considered. The Royal Air Force and Royal Navy will continue to provide coverage from their search and rescue bases as at present, while I consider the options for the long-term provision of search and rescue helicopter capability.



I will inform the House later in the year of the Government’s intentions for the longer term. The procurement strategy we adopt for the longer term will seek to ensure that the Ministry of Defence is able to complete its previously announced intention to withdraw its Sea Kings from service in 2016.



The JetStream contract in 2003 was seriously compacted within 12 months - so it can be done:eek: [I agree its more of an apples and pears comparison - but the capability is there if needed].

What it requires is a winning bidder to come up with a shed load of 'new' cabs over say a 2 year period and a training school to boot. The training is the difficult bit (finding bums on seats in sufficient quantities that are both qualified and available).
My hunch is that the DfT (if they still had possession of the poisoned chalice) will remove the mil in its entirety and hope (ha) that sufficient numbers PVR to join the new service.

Statement due 2012 (early), infrastructure in place by mid to late 2013 - training complete by early to mid 2016: Roberts your mothers brother :D

[Tallsar]

TC -as far as i can see from your comments, there is apparently little sense in running 2 competitions in such a short timescale...by definition it is likely that tax payers money will end up being spent inefficiently at a time we can least afford it. It will be used to pay for a 5 year Interm 2 contract which in the end may have no direct relationship as far as resources and aircraft are concerned with what comes after for the longer term. Cant help feel a lot of additional time and cash is about to be wasted due to some distinct risk averse decision making somewhere!:ugh: goodness knows
the SAR-H solution and assessment must still give them the most pertinent clues to be able to get on with it quicker!:mad::eek:

[IrishSarBoy]

I was hoping this would all be sorted out before the Euro collasped, oh well:(

[shetlander]

Was hearing a rumour that Bristows think they are in with a good chance!

[Sumpor Stylee]

Wonder is that the same Bristow who told their employees that given CHC were preferred bidder last year for SARH that they would be awarded the Irish contract by default.....

Or the same Bristow who indicated that there was an opportunity earlier this year to takeover the present UK SAR contract at short notice before year end.....

Or the same Bristow who were recently convinced they were the front runner for the Aberdeen based Total O&G contract.....

:suspect:

[detgnome]

I'm sure that both Bond and CHC will be claiming that they are front-runners as well.

Anyone like to speculate as to what the solution might be for the S Coast?

Would CHC bid with S92s or 139s for the S Coast?

[902Jon]

Just to add fuel to the fire..........

From the Daily Mail

Brussels launches plan to scupper UK Coastguard
By GLEN OWEN
17th July 2011


Britain's coastguards would be replaced by a new pan- European fleet under 'harmonisation' plans which would see their life-saving work being taken over by an EU coastguard corps emblazoned with the Brussels logo.
The news comes just days after Transport Secretary Philip Hammond performed a partial U-turn on cutting the number of currently operating Coastguard centres from 19 to eight, with just three remaining open 24 hours a day.
After an outcry over the safety risks, he told the Commons last week that 11 centres will remain, all of which will be operational 24 hours a day.

Under the Brussels plan, which will be voted on by the European Parliament in October, an EU Coastguard will be created to 'effectively combat current or future dangers at sea such as terrorism, piracy and trafficking'.
If approved, it would then be put before EU member countries for ratification.
Trevor Coleman, MEP for the South West of England, who uncovered the proposals, said: 'A European Coastguard service would contribute, we were told, towards the single European state "we dream of" and that "member states need to contribute to these structures and relinquish some of their power."
'No one spoke of local knowledge or the use of volunteer Coastwatch personnel.'

Partial U-turn: An outcry forced Philip Hammond, the Transport Secretary, to reverse Coastguard station cuts
UKIP leader and South East England MEP Nigel Farage said: 'We've already had our fishing rights taken away from us. Wanting us to relinquish control of our own marine borders simply must be taken off the agenda at the earliest possible opportunity.
'We've already seen the EU embassies take hold, and seen the EU try to take over defence. And immigration has been a disaster for years because of European rules'.
A spokesman for the European Parliament said: 'Once it is approved by the Parliament as a whole, it will be forwarded to the Commission, Council and Member States. The Commission then may come up with legislative proposals or take measures based on the content of the report.'
Tory Shipping Minister Mike Penning said the proposals would be resisted by the UK Government.
He added: 'A European Coastguard is not a concept that the UK would support. Her Majesty's Coastguard has a long and proud history and has a worldwide reputation for excellence.

[Max Contingency]

I'm going to put my head above the trench first!

Search and Rescue should not recognise International Boundaries.

I know the MCA does many things other than SAR but I personally have no issue with a European Coastguard. The individual nations all work from the same manuals (IAMSAR) and they spend considerable time and money every year on joint exercises and workshops to try and harmonise their plans and procedures.

My Licence says JAA and my Flight Plans go to Eurocontrol. Now if we could just get the CAA abolished with the introduction of EASA.......:hmm:

[Could be the last?]

EU Coastguard to fight terror, piracy And trafficking........ Surely this is the domain of the military..?

[chopabeefer]

The comments from hansard should be read for what they do not say. The quote states that the procurement strategy will allow the MOD to still meet it's aspiration to withdraw it's Seakings in 2016. It does not say that they will not then be replaced with a new buy,and for SAR to stay Mil. Which a little birdie (an MP) tells me is currently being looked at. Read the Hansard statement again, it is very cleverly worded...does not say SAR will be civvy, and does not say Seaking won't be replaced in the Mil SAR role.

[Could be the last?]

If the contract identified that the Seakings would be replaced with the S92, and CHC were already in the process of procuring the ac, can't the mil take up where CHC failed?

The precedent has already been made with the COMR ac used by 84 Sqn, and I am told that it works very well. Therefore, rather than going back through the bidding process again, just replicate that contract and retain mil crews and save a stack of money, plus various other PR benefits of keeping the capability military.

But more importantly, we can paint the ac yellow!!!!

SIMPLES:E

[Geoffersincornwall]

They would look a lot better in Dark Blue

:}

[Adam Nams]

The investigation into the circumstances that led to the cancellation of that procurement is ongoing.

Has "Don't worry .... I'll be back" shown up anywhere yet?

[Oneclub]

They would look a lot better in Dark Blue


With a token yellow blade to make it fair ;)

[[email protected]]

The only things that look better in dark blue are Wrens:)

If anyone wants to see how not to run a SAR setup then see the CHC operation out of Stanley for the oil rigs. Only because 2 ex-RN SAR guys were employed is there any semblance of professionalism but that is because of their efforts, not the company's.

The original plan was to have the aircraft engineer act as the winchop and lower a basket to the survivors!!! Bear in mind this is for an opeartion in the South Atlantic where sea state 6 is normal and the sea temp is plus 5 at the moment.

Fortunately the ex-RN chaps have begged borrowed and stolen (not really stolen) sufficent safety and role equipment from UK SAR contacts to at least provide a winchop and winchman combo who have a chance of actually rescuing survivors - at least by day because their aircraft has no auto-hover or rad-alt hold!!!

Now even this would be almost forgiveable if they hadn't been operating the rig shuttle for several months before the SAR capability became a reality (which was only a couple of weeks ago).

So, in summary, a professional helicopter operator gets a lucrative contract to provide rig shuttles and SAR cover and tries to do it as cheaply and minimally as possible - surely not the attitude required to run UKSAR!

[212man]

because 2 ex-RN SAR guys were employed

you missed the BHL CG, Jigsaw and GFS bit.......

[[email protected]]

you missed the BHL CG, Jigsaw and GFS bit....... 212man - I'm not sure what you mean by that, please elucidate.

[louisnewmark]

As deplorable as the company-proposed response might have been, they will only have been providing what the customer required. If the customer only wants a big hook dangling under a Bell 47, and only offers enough money to pay for that, then a contractor wouldn't be either likely or able to provide an S-92 or EC225 with all the bells, whistles and SAR-experienced crews. The fault would lie particularly with those who decided on what was required in the first place...unless, of course, the Bell 47 was genuinely sufficient for the customer's requirement.

Besides, with an RAF SAR unit just down the road, why pay for an all-weather(ish), day & night capability?

Louis

[[email protected]]

Iron - so you think therefore it is OK to put oil workers lives at risk (because that is what is happening) because it is only a 1 year contract:ugh:

Please define 'limited SAR' - you can either rescue people or you can't - you would seem to define it as pretending to be able to do the job in order to get paid without actually having any of the required equipment, training or personnel. Is this really the reality of civil SAR and if so who is regulating it?

The rigs are over 200nm away from Mount Pleasant so, with the best will in the world, at night or in poor weather we won't get to them for 3 hours or so - even if anyone hears their mayday.

Their 'limited SAR' aircraft doesn't chase the ferry aircraft so there would be a 2 hour delay by day if they ditched at the rig.

Such delays might be acceptable in the relatively benign conditions of the N Sea but in the South Atlantic???

Oh, did I mention that 2 of the pilots have never hovered over the water before and there are no training hours allocated?? What a recipe for disaster. But it's OK as it's only a 1-year contract!!!

Oh - and if 'gold-plated' means being able to do the job you are paid for and expected to do - then surely all aviation should be 'gold-plated'.

[bigglesbutler]

Crab you're shouting at the wrong people:

they will only have been providing what the customer required

Is the sad state of affairs when it comes to contracts, that is defined by the client not the provider.

Iron - so you think therefore it is OK to put oil workers lives at risk (because that is what is happening) because it is only a 1 year contract:ugh:


No that is not what Iron is saying, again the client probably decided this and the provider is supplying what was required. The cost of a person's life is what the oil companies play with not the provider. Feel free to join the many anti oil company rallies around the world, but it is a sad fact of life nowadays.

Si

P.S. What has this got to do with the thread title?

[chcoffshore]

Ah Crab,
You have dipped your toe into the world of commercial offshore flying and contracts. Something that a mil pilot wouldn't understand.

Contracts and the way they are run are regulated very closely by the customer and their aviation advisors/HSE. I should know i deal with them all the time.

I hope the 2 Ex Navy SAR pilots you mentioned apprechiate your post. :ooh:

I admire your passion for MILSAR and long may your posts continue on this subject.

:)

[WIGYCIWYT]

Worth pointing out that BI who were servicing that contract were refused permission by the UK CAA to conduct precisely the type of "Limited SAR" currently being provided by CHC, even though there was plenty of ex RN (and RAF) experience available.

They have achieved this by operating on the Cayman Islands AOC....some of us are very upset at the obvious double standard being applied!

[bigglesbutler]

May we get back onto subject, damn THAT's why my teachers always got angry at me at school.

Anyone heard anything about the new, (new?) contract?

Si

[4thright]

All potential bidders for the "son of Interim" contract had to have their applications in by today. So expect we will hear a bit more soon about that one. :rolleyes:;)

[sightlesseyes]

A brief googling only brings up Bristow as a contender. Guess we'll know more in the next few days.

Would CHC have the brass-neck to tender, I wonder?

[[email protected]]

Bigglesbutler - there will only be more speculation and wild-arsed guessing as far as the new new contract goes - anyone with hard int won't post it here.

I should have emphasised that the 2 ex-RN SAR guys are rearcrew, not pilots and that is the only reason the back of the aircraft (not including any wet-fit) is adequately prepared.

How on earth do CHC get away with operating on a Cayman Islands AOC in the Falklands???? What is not clear is who is actually responsible for regulating aviation down here, one would have thought the CAA would be in charge given that it is British territory but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Back to the thread - will CHC have the brass-neck to bid for UK SAR again? Of course they will, it's big bucks and big kudos.

[Laundryboy]

Aircraft registered in UK overseas territories (including the Cayman and Falkland Islands) are regulated under OTAR's, which are essentially watered down CAA regulations, administered by ASSI. Google otars and all is there for you to read. The person responsible for regulating aviation in the Falkland Islands is the DCA, Mr. Andrew Newman, based in Stanley.

BIH operate G-registered aircraft, and therefore have to comply with CAA regulations, operating under a British AOC (I think), from which dispensations have to be requested from the UK CAA.

There is certainly one ex RN pilot working for CHC in the Falklands, and I'm sure they have other pilots perfectly capable of adapting to the role, in whatever definition of 'limited' is being used.

The only reason this SAR cover is being set up is because the serviceability record of the MPA machine is nothing short of appalling (I have heard 50%, which surely can't be true?). No SAR cover, no fly, with the result that for every day the oil fixed wing charter is delayed costs £100k - hence the quick fix. However, in the event of a real emergency, I'm quite sure MPA would get the first call, if they were serviceable.

Word on the street is that CHC are broke, and maybe going under?

[Thomas coupling]

I hope so.
What with the jungle drums bemoaning the lousy terms and conditions the pilots and rear crew are getting together with the debacle surrounding SARH, makes you wonder if they are on a suicide mission.
Plenty out there to fill the gap they leave behind though;)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the serviceability record of the MPA machine is nothing short of appalling (I have heard 50%, which surely can't be true?)


50% sounds rather unlikely (and anyway, it's 'machines' not 'machine'!). Crab might be able to provide more information?

[bigglesbutler]

Bigglesbutler - there will only be more speculation and wild-arsed guessing as far as the new new contract goes - anyone with hard int won't post it here.

Oh absolutely, I couldn't agree more, damn I agreed with crab must need my head testing:E.

I suppose I was trying to prevent further mil-civ battles as there are other threads with such subject matter.

Si

[Wiretensioner]

Also an ex-RAF SAR pilot down there as well which escaped a mention.

Anyway Crab if you are not happy about it why not take it up with CHC management instead of slapping your gums on here. Google CHC and I'm sure a number will come up.

Wiretensioner

[Pennyroyal]

The original plan was to have the aircraft engineer act as the winchop and lower a basket to the survivors!!! Bear in mind this is for an opeartion in the South Atlantic where sea state 6 is normal and the sea temp is plus 5 at the moment.

And what may I ask is wrong with that! :} Enough techiebashing crab, I'm SURE he would have done a sterling job. Raised strand / birdcaging on the winch cable, pah; do a trip. Hydraulic leak from winch return line; where's the ragspanner. How are those casualties doing? Casualties! Sorry was to busy listening to talkSPORT on the ADF, they'll be right, do a trip!:E

[detgnome]

So onwards to 'Gap SAR', which appears to be the new name for the MCA contract. I see that the 'IPOD consortium' are bidding for the contract. Can anyone shed any light on which companies are in this group? CHC, not surprisingly, will be bidding to retain the contract.

Any knowledge of other bidders?

[4thright]

Gap? Lets hope its not too wide?:confused: Wonder how much they want to spend filling the unneccessary hole created by the SAR- H debacle? I hear its for up to 5 years again, and we will know who will take it by next Spring. Expect CHC are regretting offering those nice 92s up for the Irish contract :ugh:

[Thomas coupling]

'Gap SAR', 'Son of SAR'...all the same. I've heard that both the MoD nor the MCA will be involved in the main SARH operation next time round. The former because there isn't the political desire for it and the latter because they don't have the expertise nor infrastructure to run it.
My take: a civil consortium, owned and run by a private company, monitored by a DfT quango.........now where have I heard that before:ugh:

[Tallsar]

TC ... Foresight becomes you!:) Choo Choo....

[Seymour Belvoir]

It all seems to have gone very quiet, any news on the future of SAR?

[Thomas coupling]

Interim SAR to be resolved first, so the start date of April 2012 can be achieved.
Then this month sometime, a statement from the DfT updating the public on the "situation" regarding Son of SAR. Basically still trying to achieve the old solution in a tighter time frame.

[Seymour Belvoir]

Thanks for the update.

[[email protected]]

There are 5 down-selected bidders for gapSAR currently beavering away trying to get their detailed bids sorted by 7 Oct. Tallsar can give more detail as he is involved but he is probably way too busy at the moment.

[Tallsar]

:eek:TC - I will give any bidder more than the shirt off my back if anyone can sort the potential Gap SAR contract by April 2012! Me thinks it might come into being a little later than that.... Please check with your local CHC rep!:E

[Flounder]

July 2013 for the commencement of G-SAR I believe...

[espresso drinker]

Nothing really new to what has been posted above. Details emerge of UK Gap SAR requirement | Shephard Group (http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/rotorhub/details-emerge-of-uk-gap-sar-requirement/10078/)

Details have emerged about the UK government's interim search and rescue requirement, following the collapse of the £6 billion SAR-H project earlier this year.
The new programme, which has been dubbed the Gap Search and Rescue Helicopter Service and became open to tender in July, was launched as an emergency measure in order to ensure continuity of service following the abandonment of the SAR-H programme after irregularities were found in the bidding process.
Shephard understands that the new programme is currently being bid for by five consortia.
The Department for Transport (DfT) - the tendering department – has stated that the contract will be for six years with the option to extend a further 12 months. The department hopes to have the Gap SAR service operational in the spring of 2012 with the total cost of the contract estimated to be between £200 and £235 million.
According to Gap SAR tendering documents, the DfT is offering bidders the opportunity to make three bids: one that covers the two northern bases, one that covers the south bases and a bid that covers both regions. This may open the possibility of different providers operating the Scottish and south coast operations.
Currently, SAR helicopter operations are carried out by the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force flying the Westland Sea King, and by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) using a mix of S-92s and AW139s, provided by CHC under an interim contract operating from Portland, Lee on Solent, Shetland and the Isle of Lewis. That contract is due to end in the first half of 2012.
Under previous plans, the helicopters involved in the interim contract would have been replaced by a new single-type fleet purchased by preferred SAR-H bidder Soteria – a consortium of CHC, Thales and the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). The service would have begun operations when the interim contract ended, and was due to be fully in place by 2016, when the Sea King is planned to be retired.
Soteria's behaviour during SAR-H still remains the subject of an inquiry by military police.

Tony Osborne, London

[Thomas coupling]

Exactly what I said earlier. However Tallstar and others have suggested that this start date for INTERIM SAR (continuation of the existing one), in the absence of 5 helos now sold off to Ireland will be nigh on impossible to achieve before 2013.

My question(s) then:

Will/does the interim SAR contract have anything to do with SARH? [Legally/operatsionally]

Does the Interim SAR contract have any effect on the out of service date of the SeaKing?

Can the new and revived (when it arrives) SARH contract be slotted into the OLD SARH time frame (especially if the number of bases drops to 7 or 8)?

[Tallsar]

Espresso and TC.... I would always recommend a degree of scepticism over press articles, even from august helo friendly sources such as the Shepphard Press!:mad: That article is inaccurate on several key aspects.

What is for sure is that the new government are taking a very dynamic attitude to SAR provision and other related matters. No one knows how those dice are about to fall as yet.

We do know from the June ministerial statement that another announcement is due soon....

As for GAP SAR... Well it definitely will not be in place by mid 2012. GAP is about sustaining the 4 MCA/ HMCG SAR flights following on from the present Interim contract. Therefore, it is not contractually related by definition to anything to do with the Mil Sea King SAR units.

Where did you get 7-8 bases from? ....I dont think so.... I think too it is not appropriate to discuss whatever happens for the longer twrm as though it will be a direct replacement of SAR-H, and squeezed into a shorter timeframe. I think this Coalition has made it clear that its averse to PFI contracts and you only have to read the papers today about NHS Trust PFI debt issues to see how right that view seems to be. No doubt we will hear how the new contract is to be funded in due course. The new timeframe we have yet to discover, except we know the MoD aims to remove all Sea Kings by mid 2016. Can it be done? I am sure most of the obvious bidders would say yes, particularly as many of them regarded the SAR-H transition period as too lengthy and thefore more costly than neccessary.:ugh:;)

[[email protected]]

Will the existing interim contract just be extended (as I believe it can be) until GAP SAR can take over or have those S92s been promised to Ireland on a specific date? Can the Irish Govt actually afford the new CHC SAR contract?

Until our Govt makes its statements we won't know if there will be any military involvement in 'son of SARH' (reservists anyone?) but it seems clear that extending the Sea King OSD beyond 2016 is an expensive non-starter.

DfT have to get their heads round the enormity of the task they are taking on in respect of UK SAR and will have to work out how to fund it - especially if PFI is deemed politically and financially untenable.

[smc33]

At least four companies are competing for a contract to run part of the UK's search and rescue helicopter service.
Firms had until Wednesday to submit bids for a new five-year contract to run four coastguard rescue services in Scotland and southern England.
Bids have been submitted by Bond, Bristow, a consortium including British International Helicopters and CHC, the current coastguard contractors.
The government is to announce which has been successful by the end of the year.
The preferred bidder will take over the operation of helicopter rescue services out of bases in Portland in Dorset, Lee-on-the-Solent in Hampshire, Sumburgh in the Shetland Islands, and Stornoway in the Outer Hebrides from June 2013.
The UK's search and rescue service is currently operated out of four Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) bases, six RAF ones and two Navy ones.
All four coastguard bases are run by CHC, but its contract expires next year.
The Department for Transport needed to find a contractor to run the service after plans for a private consortium to take over all 12 UK helicopter rescue bases were shelved earlier this year.
The Soteria consortium did not get the contract after admitting it had access to commercially sensitive information.
Ministry of Defence police are investigating how the information came to be in the group's possession.
This new contract is expected to plug a gap until a private finance deal is reached for the takeover of the entire search and rescue service.

[leopold bloom]

I think it's just the way you have written the post but, for clarity, BIH is in a different consortium from CHC.:ok:

[Hilife]

It is a cut and paste job from BBC NEWS UK.

BBC News - Firms vie to run UK search and rescue service (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15179055)

Will be interesting to see if there are any novel ideas on offer.

[smc33]

Thats a direct copy and paste from BBC Scotland news website, may be the way it has been written.

[Pink Panther]

Will the existing interim contract just be extended (as I believe it can be) until GAP SAR can take over or have those S92s been promised to Ireland on a specific date? Can the Irish Govt actually afford the new CHC SAR contract?

I believe the option of the one year extension on the current UK contract has been taken. The first 92 for the new Irish contract is due around early December with some crews already rated or being rated. Word on the street is the rest will follow in 2013.

[freerideroj2]

So.....potentially 4 companies going for the bid which would be a temp contract until something is drawn up for the long term, possibly starting in 2016.

As I was someone who got a bit worked up last time, I think I'll hold fire a bit this time round. Although I do have 4 sheets of paper in my hand already...;)

[Thomas coupling]

Gap/Interim SAR starts 2013 ends 2018. One yearpast its original planned date.
Long SAR (ex SARH) is supposed to pick up where the SeaKing left off: 2016.
mmmmm?

[4thright]

I am told Gap SAR may well start earlier than July 2013 depending which bidder wins and what they are offering. Its to be a 4 year contract from the start date with possibility of a years extension ...so Gap could finish well before 2018. If the MoD Seakings are going before the end of 2016 as SDSR said, then we should hear something soon I would expect about the bigger replacement competition if there's going to be a chance to have a good competition and get it sorted in time. Wonder who is going to pay for it this time - the Greek banks? Anyone for "SAR-H 2" - 12 bases of S92s? I hope not as so much has happened since the SAR-H winner was chosen. I expect too many politicians will want to stick their noses iand spoil the whole competition.:ugh:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

12 bases of S92s? I hope not


Be careful what you (don't) wish for!

[[email protected]]

They will still have to sort out the issue of funding - since PFI is clearly not the political favourite any more, DfT are going to need a big budget to pay for UKSAR. With no military involvement, as seems likely, they won't have the ability to pull 70% of the finance from the MoD budget as was planned under SARH. 12 bases of R-66 anyone?:E

[Manchester]

PFI is only a big word for renting assets and services rather than buying them, so Gap SAR has to be done that way; no one has the capital budget to do otherwise. The government has budget lines for nearly 30 helicopters at 12 bases now, so they’ll extend the lines, perhaps transfer them to one department, and keep going; there may be a fight but it can’t much change the outcome. Renting new machinery costs more because the contractor’s bank loan is bigger, so cutting to 9 bases increases the spend at each by at least 30%. The world will end, but not for a lack of competent SAR.

[Tallsar]

Fully agree Crab... There is no doubt some intriguing business going on behind the scenes to decide what happens to the MoD money that goes to pay for their SAR capability at the moment.... And who pays for the new UK wide service... Well apart from the taxpayer of course!
ToD... Personally I dont wish for a 12 base S92 solution... But then I have never yet got my wishes... So what will happen will happen.

Neither the S92 or 225 (assuming they both remain in the running) are not without their issues after recent events, and some might argue that the 92 has yet to emerge from its recent problems with a complete clean bill of health. I am presuming that next time round, anyone who offers the 92 is likely to go for an upgraded version based on developments within the Canadian programme and improvements to the MRG and its lubrication system. There is rumour too of an upgraded 225... So you never know eh? In the commercial world, the 225 seems to be marching on regardless orders wise, so I am not convinced the next time aroumd there might not be a clsoer competition between the two.

No doubt someone in't Ministry will be letting us all know soon.
:)

[Tallsar]

Sorry Manchester, while I'll go with most of your post, I have to disagree with your comment re PFIs. They are very much about someone buying and running the assets, not renting at all. Clearly its the banks who provide the money, but the chosen Supplier is most definitely buying the cabs. That said, it can then be viewed as the user of the service (HMG) as somehow renting the service... But it surely is not like aircraft leasing or similar.
:)

[Manchester]

Under PFI, the Government rents assets and/or services – it pays a standing order for use of a hospital or an SAR service, and the contractor holds any capital assets. However out of favour that approach may be, it saves the government the up-front capital cost and a payroll of civil servants to manage the process; it won’t die. How the supplier meets the requirement by leasing or buying is his worry (within the contract). PFI is definitely like renting as far as I, a taxpayer, am concerned.

[heli1]

According to this week's Helidata News TUPE will play a big part in the choice of cab,due to the costs of retraining crews on something new.

[[email protected]]

Don't understand why TUPE would affect the choice of cab - most bases have the Sea King at the moment so any new contract will require a change of aircraft type and the new contractors could probably demonstrate both a technical and economic reason for moving people on if required, otherwise all the present military personnel would have to be offered the right to transfer to the new company.

[Tallsar]

Manc... Dont disagree with what your interpretation from a taxpayers perspective. It is unlikely however that any long term PFI that the assets would be leased... Whether hospitals or aircraft. They are bought and owned by the supplier invariably, and its often part of the deal that the government can buy the asset at the end of the PFI or if not they remain the contractors to do with as they wish.

Crab, I think heli 1's post refers to the GAP, not the SAR-H replacement programme... Which of course has yet to be announced. For a 4-5 year programme there is indeed a case that says retraining personnel is a more expensive option for such a relative short term contract. However, thats not to say it couldn't be achieved if any potetnial contractor had ways of amortising the costs elsewhere.

[[email protected]]

Tallsar, yes that would make more sense - so I hope the spares provision for the 139 is better than for the 101 - I gather the Canadians are so hacked off with AW they are considering buying pre-constructed spares (ie the ex-presidential airframes from the US) because they have been so badly seen off by the West Country pirates!

[leopold bloom]

Canada buys Obama's reject Brit choppers for spare parts ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/29/marine_one_merlin_rejects_bought_by_canada/)
Keep up Crab and, I think you will find, they are Anglo-Italian pirates.

[[email protected]]

I wasn't sure the deal had been done so I was erring on the side of caution.

Unfortunately it is the English bit of AW that has a bad reputation, made worse by this spares debacle - UK business as a whole appears to have taken a hit in the eyes of the Canadians - everyone tarred with the same brush thanks to greedy and duplicitous spares contracts.

[heli1]

Actually Crab ,the Canadians have admitted that they under provisioned for spares from the start for the Cormorant in an effort to keep costs down ,with the result that they had to cannibalise aircraft and then put more hours on the rest of the fleet ,which increased overhaul needs for which they had insufficient spares, and so on and so on.
By buying the US AW101s they are still trying to do things on the cheap.

[Manchester]

and it takes two parties to sign a spares contract. If the contract is duplicitous, one or other has to be be either careless, stupid or a civil servant

[Hilife]

How about a few words from the horses mouth on spares and availability.......


ON THE AVAILABILITY OF THE CH149 CORMORANT FLEET

4 CONCLUSIONS

Studying the performance measure of the fleet relating to Search and Rescue (SAR) standby aircraft availability in an ideal sparing situation provides an answer as to whether the fleet’s poor availability is a result of its maintenance programme (which includes its scheduled inspections and maintenance, corrective maintenance, and so on), and whether or not the problem of the fleet’s availability could possibly be solved by solving the logistical problem.

It was found that in order to meet the target range, at least 7 aircraft are required at MOB Comox, and at least 6 aircraft are required at all other MOBs assuming an ideal access to spares. Hence at least 25 or 19 aircraft are required if four or three bases are desired, respectively. :eek:

Additionally, it was shown that a 25% reduction in the durations of the major, minor, and out-of-sequence inspections of the aircraft had significant impacts on the number of aircraft required. It was found that with these reductions in place, only 5 aircraft would be required at each base in an ideal sparing situation, for a total of 20 aircraft if 4 MOBs are in operation, or a total of 15 aircraft if 3 MOBs are in operation. It should not be expected that the current fleet of 14 aircraft can operate indefinitely from 4, or even 3, MOBs without significant changes to the fleet’s maintenance program.

These results imply that the fleet’s availability problem (of not meeting the target range for the performance measure) cannot theoretically be solved simply by addressing the logistical problem of the spares – the maintenance demands of the fleet need to be reduced or the size of the fleet would have to be increased in order to meet the performance measure’s target range.

http://www.informs-sim.org/wsc08papers/142.pdf

[[email protected]]

What an utter load of bollocks that paper is - there is no real data in it at all, just simulations, estimations and comparisons with no basis in reality.

Exactly how the minor and major servicings could be reduced in duration is not even hinted at but that is the main thrust of the paper - reduce duration of servicing to increase availability.

Where is the real data from the engineering line - if minors and majors take too long, is it because they always end up waiting for spares???

The paper was written by a non-military, non engineer whose job appears to be playing with statistics and we all know the old adage about them.AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
RAMAN PALL received a B.Sc. and an M.Sc. in Mathematics from the University of Ottawa. He is currently a
defence scientist with DRDC CORA. His research interests
include military operations research, operational logistics,
inventory management, transportation modeling, and simulation modeling. He has been published in a wide range
of peer-reviewed journals and has authored several internal technical papers. Mr. Pall is also involved in the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. His e-mail address is

The paper is also 3 years old and it is only this year that the Canadians have been forced to buy the VH aircraft in order to improve their front-line availability.

It would appear that maintenance of the 149's is a contractor provision so no doubt they are blaming AW whilst AW blame the contractors.

Does integrity and reputation count for nothing in commerce any more??

[chopabeefer]

In the UK forces in general, and the rotary world in particular, there is a HUGE amount of uncertainty about what will happen in the near future. Will Merlin go to the Navy? Will RAF get Puma 2? etc etc.

A mate in a position to know as much as anyone, told me yesterday to get ready for the Seaking OSD to, and I quote 'move right significantly - I'm talking years, not months...'.

Apparently Gov't are waking up to the potential of an extended life Seaking to save money in the short term. If he had more detail he did not share it, but he is working in the place, and a position, to know what is being discussed. Of course, it may well only ever be discussed, but he thinks this one has legs, and may run. Here's hoping...

[500e]

"Does integrity and reputation count for nothing in commerce any more"??.
There is no answer to that question Crab :sad:

[squib66]

Any news of the timescales now the bids are in?

[shetlander]

Was about to say?! Has it died its death AGAIN?!

[Flounder]

10th January for announcement of the big winner...

[shetlander]

10th January for announcement of the big winner...

Are there any details of the bids? Or is this being kept tight lipped?

[Digital flight deck]

My best bet for the winner is the British Military. :ok:

[Flounder]

Are there any details of the bids? Or is this being kept tight lipped?

I know nothing...but...I would imagine it is extremely sensitive information that is being kept very closely guarded. Unlikely anything is going to be heard until the announcement proper and that's only 9 weeks away. You don't have long to wait.

[squib66]

Flounder - thank you.

My best bet for the winner is the British Military.

Are they bidding? If so what would the TUPE situation be? Certainly their maintenance is already civilianised.

[lundytom]

Is anybody aware of a new plan?

[Art of flight]

Any chance the people organising all of this could get involved in helping us form the new (UK) national police air service............that way we could just carry on for another few years without having to change anything!

[Shell Management]

One of NPAS' next targets is to seek a single central paramilitary service of public helicopters combining SAR, police, EMS and fire support.

[Tallsar]

SM... I am rather amused that you think the new NPAS will have such authority! While much better alignment and coordination between the various services you mention is on the cards over the next few years.. I don't think the NPAS is in a position to direct such events. RUSI is publishing it's report next week on it's UK "blue light" aviation studies... So worth a read by all interested parties and individuals. Its not government policy yet, of course, but I think it's going to have some influence on it in due course.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

RUSI is publishing it's report next week on it's UK "blue light" aviation studies...


About a week too late then...oh dear!

[Geoffersincornwall]

A couple of weeks back I had the pleasure of teaching a couple of guys from 'La Compania Aeronautica Italienne' (apologies if I got that wrong in any way). This organisation is apparently tasked with providing aviation resources for 'disasters' of any kind within Italy. It seems that Italy has the normal SAR outfits provided by Navy (includes CG) and Air Force (organised by the Air Force) but also has this additional layer called CAI. They take control of any natural (or other) disaster and have the power to use their own (limited) resources but also have the power to co-opt aviation resources from the military and also from any commercial source that is appropriate. Now that has the sound of a well organised public service aviation unit. Would that work in the UK rather than have the constant turf wars between the various elements that seek primacy in any event that requires support from aviation resources in the Navy, Coast Guard, Air force, 43 police forces and 23 HEMS units?

G.

[Tallsar]

What you driving at then ToD?:confused:

[Bertie Thruster]

Geoffers; with service level agreements now mostly agreed, maturing air desks in most regional control rooms and 'airwaves' comms providing instant flexibility, the UK charity hems world is moving out of its parochial 'turf wars' age into a responsive era of regional support.

For example the East Midlands Ambulance Service and surrounding Ambulance Services can call upon local air ambulances funded by the people of many different nearby counties, to fly to incidents anywhere in the entire area those Services cover. In a large scale incident anywhere in the Midlands, up to 7 HEMS helicopters could be on scene within 30 minutes, if required. All coordinated temporarily from the airdesk of the nearest controlling Ambulance Service.

[Could be the last?]

Rumour buzzing is that an announcement will be made tomorrow re: SARH!

[Tallsar]

I too would agree. I believe we will hear something official during Monday.

One pedantic but important thing though... SAR-H died during January 2011. Whatever comes next will not be called that, so let's just try and avoid using this term for the future programme(s) ...Please?:)

[[email protected]]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back over the water.....................SAR-H II.....dada,,,,,,,dada........dadadadadada etc

[detgnome]

Search and Rescue Helicopters - News - Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/greening-20111128)

Well there it is. In service by 2016, awarded early 2013. Boulmer and Portland to go...

[Sanus]

That's very little time between new contract selection (early 2013) and expiration of the present 'interim contract' (June 2013). Is there provision to extend the current CHC SAR S-92's & 139's on-contract beyond June 2013?

[Flounder]

Yes GAP-SAR, currently being scrutinised by DfT for award in Jan 2012 for 5-6 years, so covers any overlap required.

[Tallsar]

Sanus.. I fear you may be just a tad behind the drag curve.
There is already a potential Interim replacement contract (called GAP SAR) which is being competed as we write. Decision due in January we believe. This is a 4-5 year contract and if you look closely at the Ministerial statement, is to be replaced itself at it's end with the 2nd phase of the new long term procurement now announced. The competition timings for this second phase have yet to be announced.
The 1st phase of this new long term SAR policy and procurement is to replace all the present military Sea Kings with whatever wins. As the Ministerial statement says, this competition will have been decided on a 10 year contract by early 2013 to allow all the SAR
SKs to be replaced by the MoD's SDSR retirement date of March 2016.
At the end of both Long term competitions there will be only 10 SAR bases rather than 12 (Boulmer and Portland having closed)

[Fareastdriver]

Looks like Crab will be looking for a job.

I hope this thread will be a continue to be constructive one and not full of snide gloating comments addressed to him.

[Thomas coupling]

Am I right in thinking all mil exemptions for a civvy ATPL(H) cease as of 1.4.12.? And jobs in the new SAR world require IR's too, which means to get your IR done under the same auspices you need to book in Jan 2012 so that you can bolt it onto your ATPL exemptions? That'll be soon then...................

[Epiphany]

I hope this thread will be a continue to be constructive one and not full of snide gloating comments addressed to him.

Absolutely not. I mean if it had gone the other way we wouldn't have heard a squeak out of him would we? Anyhow Crab should be quite happy. He might now just be able to swing a SH conversion and a posting to somewhere warm and exciting.

[pr00ne]

This seems an eminently sensible decision and one long overdue. One small niggle though, that looks to be a HUGE area with no cover stretching from Lossiemouth to Leconfield. According to the MCA's own statistics there are two areas of intense and three of medium activity in the middle of that large gap.

Thoughts?

[Flounder]

I don't think the 10 bases are required to remain in their present locations so something could be acheived by moving the Leconfield asset North and the Lossie South to fill a gap?

Will the non-Military future continue to operate out of Military airfields or is the plan to move to suitable civilian airfields . One or two of Humberside, Teeside, Newcastle, Aberdeen, Inverness along the East coast for example and a number of other options for Chivenor, Valley, Wattisham etc.

It seems as good a time as any to re-jig the whole thing and start with a blank piece of paper.

[bolkow]

regarding snide comments directed towards crab, I too agree that it should not descend to that level. In fact I find it abhorrent that a man of his standing, service and expertise should have to read anything of that type. Whatever happens, having specialists with his experience facing possible redundancy is sheer lunacy.

[Support Monkey]

Moving the bases may well get better coverage, but when you have to pay all those new infrastructure costs for hangars, accomodation, landing fees, etc. your bid is going to be a non starter. Is it going to be direct funded by the DfT or are we looking at a 'son of PFI'?

[Flounder]

I don't think the MOD are going to let the civvie operators use the existing facilities for nowt though, add to that the issues of using creaking infrastructure at Military airfields that may not have the required facilities.

Some movement is inevitable I think...

[Tallsar]

SM and Flounder... you both have pertinent points from my perspective. No bidder will win by gold plating any solution or overdoing expenditure on infrastructure. However, to get 10 bases to work will need consideration on relocation of some bases as Flounder suggests notwithstanding the higher transit speeds from any of the new cabs. Clearly this will also be influenced by the customers's exact requirements for availability and response... It would be foolish to think at this stage that these will remain precisely the same as for the dead S**-H programme. Furthermore, the longer term costs of staying at any of the present bases will also need looking at given the great changes in MoDs plans since the SDSR. Of course, the final costs will also be affected by what is defined as accceptable infrastructure in these impecunious days... Don't think there will be many votes for more Leconfields or Lee on Solents around the place.
BTW - this is not another PFI... ;)

[[email protected]]

I wonder if they ran a competition to select the new and catchy name for SAR-H?

Maybe there were irregularities in the process and a new winner was not selected?

Maybe they just couldn't be a*sed and decided it would be cheaper to keep the same letterheads and business cards.

SAR-H - the process formally known as ............. SAR-H.

If they are going to select new bases (possibly an expensive option) I hope they learn the lesson from moving SARF HQ to Valley ie if you want a well qualified and well motivated workforce, don't make them live in a 3rd world environment unless you pay them enough to compensate. Unlike the MoD you can't just order people to work there!

Unfortunately for my admirers, I won't be able to go SH in 2016 as I retire then;) However, a few more years flying thereafter in SAR-H is not entirely out of the question!

[Tallsar]

Peeps

The competition is formally known as UK SAR Helicopters or Long SAR.

For all those of you genuinely interested in the competition rather than personalities ( fun as that might be for some ( or not!:E)).

There is all the detail both in the recently added news note on the DfT website and in the various downloadable docs obtainable at this link:

UK Search & Rescue Helicopter Service - Publications - Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/uk-sar-helicopter-services)

Let's hear it for Open Government!

Enjoy... There is much detail in there amongst the government jargon and civ service yuck speak. Some of the docs are of no relevance unless you are a potential bidder. The timescales are all in there too.

You will note that the whole service is to be replaced in ONE competition in 2 Bidding Lots of varying contract length. Effectively the 10 remaining bases (or nearby!) are to be split into the 2 Lots... Each Lot of 5 bases being driven by the need to carry a minimum of 8 casualties including 2 stretchers, or a minimum of 4 casualties including 2 stretchers. The higher capacity ac bases need to be able to go at least 200nm (250 from Stornoway), and 170 nm from the other 5 bases.

On with the debate! :ugh::)

[[email protected]]

Our briefing notes still call it SAR-H which is what I expect 'UK SAR Helicopters' will be abbreviated to;)

Will the DfT be expecting the military to provide SMEs to assess technical compliance with the bids as happened before or will they take that task on themselves?

Interesting that they have forced a 2 type service rather than let the bidders suggest options.

it would appear that no current base is 'safe' since there is reference to 'in the vicinity of' current bases rather than specifying that any present bases must be retained.

Let us see what falls out of this process.

[Tallsar]

Dinosaurs can call it SAR-H if they wish.. But they will be recognised as such!::ouch:

Don't agree with your point Crab that the competition rules are trying to dictate 2 types, they are just making clear their minimum requirements and if anything, trying to broaden the competition, make it more open, and give it potential for more resilience by possibly having more than one aircraft type.

Industry has been engaged with the government since SAR-H's demise, and much of what I read suggests as much flexibility as is possible in the circumstances, including coping with wayward politicians.

As you say... All will emerge.:)

[Non Emmett]

Interesting comments on here regarding possibly relocating some SAR-H assets to other bases. Newquay instead of Culdrose springs to mind, the latter for instance already has the Cornwall Air Ambulance and maintenance facilities for BIH plus their S-61s are going to operate out of NQY at least temporarily from next summer.

When Rescue 193 for instance is tasked in the wee small hours from CU, what typically is involved in terms of manpower apart of course from the flight crew? Would it typically be much less from a civvie provider? Naive questions, no doubt but I'm interested. The SAR crews at Culdrose and at Chivenor are held in the highest regard by the civvie population in the two Counties and I wish all concerned the very best in the changes which still lie some time ahead.

[cokecan]

does ''or a minimum of 4 casualties including 2 stretchers'' mean that the AW-139 is out of the picture for SAR-H2.0?

[Thomas coupling]

Crab: you certainly know how to win friends and influence people with comments like that about West Wales, don't you?
Perhaps you should have tried for an Uruguayan SAR job while you were out there?

Of course, as Tallstar commented, Industry constantly 'massage / coerce / lobby / nudge government (DfT) about the perfect scheme. That is why there is the option to offer more than one type. The old contract was a little less elastic in that regard.
In addition, versatility now will lend itself to a more joined up National Emergency Services Air Force in 2023 or thereabouts, with 92's, 169's, 135's, dotted all around the country.
"Industry" has already christened this foundling: "LONG SAR". Long live SAR(H).
Tobe honest, I thought it would be 9 bases and a 5 yr contract. That would come across as a cheaper product in the eyes of the taxpayer. [Smoke and mirrors]. But someone has pulled back from that fast ball.:D

The good news is that it's being run by civvies for civvies.....:ok:

teh he he..................................

[Tallsar]

Tee Hee indeed TC... and just when I thought you were going to keep it clean!:}
I hope this thread doesn't relapse into that old mil vs civ argument that occupied most of the SAR-H one. Like it or not... And I know many out there don't like it, the dye is now cast.
The MoD hasn't enough cash even to keep some key combat capabilities going, so it's hold on UK SAR has gone in any shape or form.
Let's not forget too, that fully civilianised it may be in the future, but it's still a public service operation working to do what the UK Government requires it to do.
PS - lovely new hangar at Portland for sale.... Great sea views!:{

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Newquay instead of Culdrose springs to mind


I'd be surprised if this happened...why move the aircraft further from the open ocean and closer to Chivenor? Surely one of the benefits of the new order will be to remove the current crazy situation where the long-range aircraft has to pop into another SAR base for fuel on its way out to sea (ie Chiv passing Culdrose, or Lossie passing Stornoway). Your suggestion is akin to moving Stornoway to Plockton, or Sumburgh to the Orkneys! And I don't imagine that the new SAR aircraft will have too much in common with either the Air Ambulance or the S-61!

More likely IMHO is to move Lossie to Aberdeen...now that is an airfield with pedigree in operating large helicopters, and it also reduces somewhat the distance to Leconfield, given that Boulmer will be no more.

But we'll see...

[Thomas coupling]

The other change being ushered in, is a new type of SAR. Because the majority of SAR was military, it had a military remit (downed mil pilots over the sea, predominantly (and yes, I know this wasn't ever the norm in reality)). Now the stats have been reviewed and other (mainly european) operators observed, I would suggest there is an appetite by the operators to push further afield. Hence we we will see a greater emphasis on in land SAR, large scale disasters and so on. Keep a close eye on who steps up to the plate and with which weapon(s) of choice:E
My money is on.......................Eurocopter.;)

[Fareastdriver]

I would not be at all surprised if Marignane were beavering away designing a specialist SAR version of the 225.

[Vie sans frontieres]

a specialist SAR version of the 225

Is that one you can stand up in?

Have I missed it? I can't see any reference to training locations in the DfT's documents. Without a common training location for the provision of introductory and conversion training, you'll end up with different interpretations of SOPs, different kit and consequently, different levels of service at the various flights. Surely the aim is to eradicate that.

[[email protected]]

Vie, why? We haven't managed it in the last 70 years so why start now;)

TOTD - Chiv would only refuel at Culdrose if their cab was already on a job and another long-ranger in the SW came up. Normally our long-rangers are West of Ireland and require refuelling at Castletown Bere.

TC - just because you like it there doesn't mean everyone else has to suffer:E The truth hurts;)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Chiv would only refuel at Culdrose if their cab was already on a job and another long-ranger in the SW came up


...or they didn't have an aircraft, or there was only one job but it was beyond the range of a Mk 5.

I'm well aware that this doesn't happen often, but my original point stands that there seems little point moving the SAR unit 'inland' from Culdrose to Newquay. Or am I missing something?

[bolkow]

Hey Pink Panther, Ireland can afford twice the amount of s92's than they have oredered for SAR, did'nt they just get 7 billion form the UK taxpayer?

[[email protected]]

TOTD, what would be more interesting is how the RN would try to 'control' operations on the airfield by a civilian unit - I suspect the extra flexibility of Newquay (or other location) would make operating away from Culdrose more attractive. Not to mention CU's poor weather factor.

[Tourist]

Crab

What poor weather factor?

Culdrose is fantastic for rotary, and has two brilliant fall back options, Falmouth docks and Penzance for the truly bad days. One of them will always be an option.
Never ever had to divert in a helicopter from Culdrose, and only once fixed wing despite launching in red as a red thing countless times on SAR shouts.

[TipCap]

Crab

We were controlled by the RN at Lee-on-Solent in the early days of the CG SAR in the late 80's. (ATC and airfield movements that was). There were no real problems there.

Obviously the "shouts" were controlled/co-ordinated by the CG

[Non Emmett]

Just a thought Tourist - the Penzance helicopter facilities will surely all too soon become part of Sainsburys car park. Whilst I enquired here about the Culdrose SAR facility moving to Newquay I greatly admire the work 771 have done and would prefer it to remain at CU as the base has served us well.
I hear today from a mate in North Devon that Nick Harvey M.P. is suggesting in the North Devon Journal that once SAR is privatised the Chiv unit could move to Exeter or some other location.

[Shell Management]

With all due respect to the MP, many bases could be used and I doubt he has any knowledge of the matter, just a keeness to have his name in the press.

[3D CAM]

Why would they want to move to Exeter with a relatively new hangar etc. being turned over to ??? when Portland closes??:confused::confused::(
3D.

[Thomas coupling]

Further stuff:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/470260-sarh-6.html

[Saint Evil]

Not long now before the announcement. Actually quite excited.

[Pink Panther]

Will we know tomorrow or not? It's all very quiet.:E

[Bremen]

The winners may have been notified late last week. My money is on Chc lost the lot.

[Hilife]

With seven UK SAR configured platforms already in place, partly paid for and doing the job very well (or so I hear), I would have thought the least risk solution would be to snopake the Interim SAR contract and insert GAP-SAR on the header and keep going, so it will be interesting to see which operator and choice of platform(s) is/are selected.

[Flounder]

How much money are you placing on CHC losing the lot? PM me for odds because I'll be happy to take your bet.

[3D CAM]

"seven UK SAR configured platforms already in place"
Aren't four of them earmarked for eventual transfer to Ireland?
3D

[Bremen]

And Sikorsky are ready to supply 4 more brand new SAR fit S 92A.
High fives in Houston anyone?

[Pink Panther]

If I were a betting man an each way bet might be the safer option.

[Bremen]

You dont need the headache of 2 operators, particularly 1 with a goverance issue has not been cleared up yet. Although they have been allowed bid. Most likely to keep the other 2 bidders honest.

[Thomas coupling]

Bremen, mark my words, the CHC issue will NEVER be resolved and will be kicked into the long grass forever. Too embarrassing for the government.

Much more exciting is to watch how the 'competitors' align themselves with eachother to get the job done. Now who is going to jump into bed with CHC at this stage of not knowing what might happen to them.

[Pink Panther]

Looks like your drum will have to roll a while longer:). So, no word today:confused: all quiet from the usual suspects:oh:

[4thright]

Anyone heard anything yet? A mate tells me that the applications by potential bidders to play in the big competition had to be in yesterday. Wonder who has applied?:oh:

[jimf671]

MAIN 2015-2026

-Ministerial Statement
Search and rescue helicopters - News - Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/greening-20111128)

-Online publication of process
UK Search & Rescue Helicopter Service - Publications - Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/uk-sar-helicopter-services)

-Contract Notice
Service contract - 377518-2011 - TED Tenders Electronic Daily (http://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:377518-2011:TEXT:EN:HTML)

-Events
Tuesday 10 Jan 2012: "Time limit for receipt of tenders or requests to participate".

BBC News - Key date for search and rescue helicopter bidders (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-16471345)

"Date of dispatch of invitations to tender or to participate to selected candidates": not nominated in the notice. Just less than a month later for the Gap contract, so perhaps expect mid to late February. Perhaps the bidders will be known before that date but perhaps not.



GAP 2013-2017

-Ministerial Statement
Search and Rescue Interim Contract - News - Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/hammond-20110711)

-Contract Notice
Service contract - 225062-2011 - TED Tenders Electronic Daily (http://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED%3ANOTICE%3A225062-2011%3ATEXT%3AEN%3AHTML&src=0)

-Type of Process
"Accelerated negotiated procedure" resulting form an "Emergency need". The
MCA believed to be still making it up as they go along.

-Events
A contract award is expected to occur this month: January 2012. An announcement is expected through the usual channels of a ministerial statement and a DfT news release. February wouldn't surprise me though.

-Problems
Well, time obviously, since this is an emergency procedure. There are also clues in some quarters that the key techical requirements are similar to the current 2007 contract. (If you have any plans to break your leg, in the extreme north or on the south coast, then try to do it during daylight hours.)

BBC News - Search and rescue contractors face night goggle issue (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-15971826)



REGS

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP999.pdf

http://easa.europa.eu/certification/flight-standards/doc/oeb-supporting-documents/fcl-ops/JAR-OPS-3.pdf

[jimf671]

... February wouldn't surprise me though.

2012-01-16 " ... an announcement in the coming weeks"

[Thomas coupling]

decision made for gap SAR..official declaration beginning of feb.:(

[Saint Evil]

and the winner(s) is(are).........?

[snaggletooth]

...an in-house bid from the current RAF SARF Cdr! :D

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

...an in-house bid from the current RAF SARF Cdr!


...using super-annuated Pumas, presumably?:eek:

[Wiretensioner]

Bristow have got the Northern flights and CHC have kept the southern ones. Recently announced.

Information from ex-colleagues at the coal face as they say

Wiretensioner

[Sanus]

CHC will keep their AW139's for their southern contract but anyone know if Bristow bid S-92's or 225's for Scotland?

[shetlander]

So to put it simply:

England - CHC?
Scotland - Bristows?

[MyTarget]

I hope CHC go down the pan. To the guys/girls in the SAR Scotland if it wasn't for you and your can do attitude the contract would have failed long ago. Good luck with the future and possible tx to Bristows.

[Wiretensioner]

CHC will keep their AW139's for their southern contract but anyone know if Bristow bid S-92's or 225's for Scotland?

92's

Wiretensioner

[shetlander]

Any news on the colour scheme's? They staying the same or changing?

As for Bristows, good shout on their part, with the Scatsta operation fully S92, then an additional base at Sumburgh will prove to come in handy!

[3D CAM]

"additional base at Sumburgh will prove to come in handy!"
Eoin had better get the old hangar unlocked.:D
Or are Bristow going to take on the CHC hangar. Yes, I know it's a bit early for that sort of decision but....?
3D

[bigglesbutler]

Or are Bristow going to take on the CHC hangar.

Didn't the Coastguard pay for the refurb and "upgrades"? I though that was the plan originally................... ah........ I see my mistake...... originally.

NVM :P

Si

[SARowl]

I hope CHC go down the pan. To the guys/girls in the SAR Scotland if it wasn't for you and your can do attitude the contract would have failed long ago. Good luck with the future and possible tx to Bristow.

So the "English" bases had nothing to do with it? I thought Coastguard SAR was British, or has Alex Salmond sneaked something past the Scottish electorate already?

[Bounce Bounce]

Glad to see engineering and pilots mentioned here holding it all together.

All SAR crewmen go home as you seem to be surplus to requirement :ugh:

Stinking (sorry normal) attitude :ok:

[inputshaft]

Ironchefflay,

I think you've got the previous poster's comments 180deg out. I'm on another CHC contract where the engineers, pilots and SAR crewmen work like crazy to keep the customer happy and a good reputation locally. But that's despite no support from our senior managers, penny pinching on all issues and a complete lack of forward planning and logistics support.

So, I'd be very surprised if My Target doesn't agree that everybody's individual effort on the coalface has been superb, but, frankly, CHC as a company deserves little at present.

[Oneclub]

Hmmm, this seems like a nice solution for all parties? CHC while perhaps being seen to be partially hit for their previous governance issues, will probably not be that dissapointed with this. They have never made a penny on this contract and the majority of their logistics and manning issues have always been with the northern bases, often incuring customer applied financial penalties as a result. CHC still gets to keep a foot in the door with the southern bases for when it comes to bidding on the main contract and is now able to release their S92s to Ireland as they are contractually obliged to.
Bristow get another two S92 bases in locations that will be easy to move into and where they can operate with a pool of spares and dual qualified aircrew/engineers (SAR and Oil and Gas) in order to improve availability across both business units. Bristow also now have a foothold again in UK SAR for when it comes to bidding on the main contract.

Hopefully, this will be little more than another change of pension provider for the sarboys (and girls) involved.

Good luck and safe flying whatever company badge you wear on your flight suit.

[SARowl]

I agree with Oneclub. I also think this was a deliberate decision by DFT/MCA/Treasury to include Bristow in the new gap contract. Bristow will now have the management, engineering, aircrew and logistics in place to bid for the new SARH contract: two bidders fighting for the contract will drive bid prices down. However, a split contract SARH will be interesting!

[BabyGravy]

So that's what the 2 92's on the UK register where the reg's are g-cg** will be for then ! My guess is Bristow will get the SAR-H replacement contract and the 139's and CHC will simply be a stop gap until more 92's are available.

[Flounder]

I also think this was a deliberate decision by DFT/MCA/Treasury to include Bristow in the new gap contract. Bristow will now have the management, engineering, aircrew and logistics in place to bid for the new SARH contract

This will all be in place in the next 12 months before LONG-SAR bids are completed and announced? I'm not sure how this will give the DfT time to assess the Bristow set-up.

I would agree if GAP-SAR allowed any time for CHC & Bristow to operate at the same time in N/S but the time scale doesn't allow for that. Bristow will obviously be bidding for LONG-SAR regardless of whether they won any or all of the GAP-SAR contract.

[Thomas coupling]

Rumour has it (after all this is pprune) that the front runners for long SAR, are:
Bristows, CHC and Bond. It seems no-one else is keen..........................
No doubt, consortiums will/may form after the bidding war has ended, but so far, so limited. Any of these could do the job with their eyes closed. :oh:

[Gap SAR goes to show that the government have short memories vis a vie CHC eh?

[Spanish Waltzer]

Rumour has it (after all this is pprune) that the front runners for long SAR, are:
Bristows, CHC and Bond. It seems no-one else is keen..........................


If they are the front runners then that implies there are others. if not they are surely just the runners.....then again it is just a rumour :ok:

Its an interesting twist to the competition this time with the ability to bid for one or both of the 'parts'. Time will tell whether half or all is more popular but I assume there are significant technical and commercial benefits to DfT by having a two type fleet provided by different contractors?

I think this soap opera has many more episodes to run & I dont think we have been introduced to all the characters yet...:ouch:

SW

[jimf671]

So if we get Bristows back do we get night vision back?

That would be nice.

Based on the stats in Provision and Coverage Report, update 2006, it would be very nice.

[explorer99]

do we get night vision back?

Check the requirement, jimf671 (ie 'Low level over land at night').

E99

[pasptoo]

So if we get Bristows back, do we get night vision back?

Sorry, IIRC, I must have missed the Bristow fitted NVG S61, with CAA qualified crews. You can't get back something you never had :ugh:

The Military will continue with NVG until the UKSAR contract takes over with that requirement :ok:

[Flounder]

NVG is contractual requirement not the whim of an individual operators. If you asked the CHC S92 crews I'm sure they would happily adopt NVG to improve their capability but CHC/Bristow aren't going to pay for it if it's not stipulated as a requirement for GAP SAR. LONG SAR, as said above, will see an NVG in use.

[jimf671]

Check the requirement, jimf671 (ie 'Low level over land at night').

Oh, I have done. :8 Many times. :ugh: Sometimes in my sleep. :zzz:


I can dream though.

[[email protected]]

It will be a NVD - you can't specify that it is goggles (although it will be) you can only stipulate the capability ie operate down to 2 mlux at night.

[Tallsar]

It will be interesting to see if the official HMG announcement on GAP matches the (well founded?) rumours on here!
As for the supposed winners... it wouldn't be a surprise if Bristow returned to the UK SAR stage at this juncture. However, looking at some recent posts on here, they will not have a chance to prove their new service as it will not have entered service before the long term UK SAR decison has been made. GAP requires a service from July 2013, whereas the DfT's online competition schedule for the long term UK SAR service states that this competition will be done and dusted by Feb 2013. We shall have to await any announcement sometime this February as to how many companies and consortia have been invited to compete. I would be very surprised if only Bristow, CHC and Bond have applied! :eek::)

[Gene Genie]

Good point Tallsar, word where we are is that AW may bid with a 169/189 package for the small/large lift respectively. I believe they are still in the mock up/presentation stage and may not be certified until 2015. It's just a rumour though...

[Ron Fenest]

Gene Genie

I doubt AW will offer a service as they didn't submit a PQQ. Eurocopter did though!

I would suggest that no OEM will offer to prime this as there is a piece of pie in it for all of them with the right consortium and better to remain agnostic.

There are many other players interested aside from the usual suspects always talked about here, and just because they don't currently have a footprint in the UK does not mean that they are not perfectly capable of doing the job and doing it well. Might be a nice change to see some fresh approaches out there.

[swampqueen]

I am not really part of all this chat other than having to fly it. Therefore I don't understand the TLA'S. I am sure if you are in the Know then they are quite illuminating but..........

[swampqueen]

Just don't

[Gene Genie]

Ron Fenest
I take it that PQQ is a tender of interest or similar. I think the AW thing may be more hope than expectation from some quarters, but thanks for the reply.
As you say, it would be interesting to see some fresh names in the mix.

[louisnewmark]

Swampqueen:

NVD = Night Vision Device

PQQ = Pre Qualification Questionnaire

OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer

HMG = Her Majesty's Government

DfT = Department for Transport

Does that help?

Louis

[swampqueen]

Thanks for that. I am just getting old and cranky.

[212man]

Talking of old and cranky - none of those are TLAs......

SAR is though :ok:

[Flounder]

It depends if your definition of a TLA is Three Letter Abbreviation or Three Letter Acronym? I would agree that SAR is an acronym and DfT an abbreviation...I believe...but I know nothing.

[louisnewmark]

Yup, to me a TLA is a 3 Ltr Abbrvn.

Back to the thread...

[Thomas coupling]

8th Feb Notify shortlisted bidders.
13th Feb Issue of ITPD.
8th May Return of outline bids.
11th - 17th May Bidder presentations.
29th June Notify shortlisted bidders.
27th Aug Issue ITT.
24th Sept Return of final tenders.
21 Jan 2013 Notice of intention to award contract

5th Feb 2013 Sign Contract.

FWIW. On the whole it's PDQ, IMHO.

[Spanish Waltzer]

Tallsar,

GAP requires a service from July 2013, whereas the DfT's online competition schedule for the long term UK SAR service states that this competition will be done and dusted by Feb 2013.

Your wise words make an interesting point - Lets assume that company A has been/are about to be awarded gap sar or an element of it (depends on which rumours you believe).

Company A will no doubt also be involved in some way in bidding for long SAR. Should company A hear in Feb 13 that they are unsuccessful in winning a part in long SAR where might that leave their loyalty to implementing a successful gap sar service from July 13?

Likewise if company A is awarded an element of both gap & then long but screws up gap where does that leave long?

SW

[Manchester]

Easy. It’s called Business.

1. If Company A wins Gap-SAR and loses Long-SAR, it’s got a few years of revenue then it looks elsewhere with a new line in its CV. If it loses interest, see 2.

2. If it wins one or both and doesn’t perform, the customer implements the incentive system, so Company A loses revenue and reputation until it becomes more profitable to perform, when revenue recovers and, a few years behind, the lost reputation fades. All the while, lives are saved, perhaps not always to the standard of the perfectionist but whisper it - a perfect world doesn’t actually exist - and the taxpayer gets reasonable value for money.

Don’t look for the psychology – follow the money.

[jimf671]

Yes, business is business.

However, it's a different business that's nearly upon us.

Contractor SAR aircraft will no longer be peripheral. They will be the only available service. Every SAR aircraft in the UK will be operated under a contract and AOC, in a world of Open Government, with more developed regulatory frameworks, where every stakeholder can look up the details on the internet.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

SAR is an acronym and DfT an abbreviation


...whereas the MOD view SAR as an anachronism...:p

[jimf671]

...whereas the MOD view SAR as an anachronism...

... until 2015 when we'll be out of Afghan and awash with helicopters and nothing for them to do. :ugh:

[Tallsar]

SW.. It could be more intriguing than that! If the rumours are true about GAP, and its gone 2 ways, it is in theory, also possible that the UKSAR comp could go to 2 others and not those chosen for GAP ( I know this seems unlikely... But it is possible depending in who bids)... So from 2013 we could face an interesting prospect that there are 2 contractors preparing to start their new GAP service, and 2 others starting their prep for the UK wide service, and in the middle of that the old MoD "contractor" ( which itself has 2 operators with their own views on SAR close down) getting ready to work with all 6 of themselves on an effective and reliable transition plan to get to the nirvana of a UK wide service sometime in 2017/8.... Good grief vicar!:ugh::mad:::{

[Thomas coupling]

Tallsar: coincides beautifully with my theory that in 2013, a light will go on, in DfT and they will realise that there is (a) disparity between (too many)operators and/or a chasm forming between the old and the new service, requiring an extension to the SeaKing service [resurrecting logisitics/spares/maintenance/training/aircrew - is NOT going to be cheap, or quick:eek:]. Mark my words :ugh:

In the perfect world, a wise old sage in DfT will pick the GAP incumbents (B, CHC) for a seamless transition to Long SAR....sorry eurocopter/lockheed/bond :oh:

[Manchester]

Let’s just analyse your worries:

Logistics and Spares: Most companies in the industry have high tech kit miles from their headquarters and more miles from the OEMs. Getting bits to the right place on time is what they do already if they are to get paid.

Aircrew / training: most of them including chief pilots and trainers will TUPE from Company A to Company B or Company C if they want to stay in well-paid and rewarding jobs. At base level only the logo will change. The interesting challenge will be to re-attitude a minority of the ex-military people.

MOD working with 6 contractors: I hope not. The Navy and the RAF need to talk to the project manager who also talks to the two incumbent and the two future contractors and does what his title says.

Complex and demanding, sure, but the industry does contain a few professionals.

Next?

[Tallsar]

Manc...you are right to highlight that these things are more within the grasp of those companies and professionals than perhaps my previous post suggested at first glance. I have little doubt that all six interested parties ( if thats how it turns out) would work hard to ease the transition issues, although none of us should underestimate the effect of commercial jealousy once things pan out against certain contractors... Who knows? Whatever, such a scenario certainly increases the complication and decreases the transition management efficiencies, with a resultant increased risk that things will not go smoothly. Bearing in mind that new aircraft types (with associated delays) may also be part if the solution ( look at what happened with Interim here for some clues), then there is more risk in such a managed process involving a large number if contractors. After all if any contractor has a contract end or start date... That's what has to be achieved and stuck to.
Equally I think TC is right to raise the prospect of the DfT potentially realising
that these issues do need some degree of rationalisation...I fear however they have built a competitive environment locked on a course governed by immutable EU competitive jurisdiction... So their room for manoeuvre may be limited.
As for keeping the SK on.. A wise owl in the MOD is no doubt keeping a close eye on this possibility...although I have little doubt the DfT will do it's utmost
to avoid such a situation occurring.

It's going to be an interesting initial 18 months.... :rolleyes::)..and then beyond

[[email protected]]

The interesting challenge will be to re-attitude a minority of the ex-military people. what? away from a mindset of delivering world-class SAR, day and night, in all weathers?

The only re-attituding [sic] will be to accept there won't be 4 hours training available every day and that the aircraft should be more serviceable.

[Geoffersincornwall]

What we are looking for - in the re-attitude stakes - is the desire to be as good as you possibly can with just one hour of training a day. There are many who have to manage with NO daily training so let's think positively about this new strategy given that the profligacy of the past has meant that we have to leave the Rolls Royce (sorry we had to sell that), OK the Bentley (Oh! we had to sell that too!) then the Jaguar (what - we sold that too!) - well let's just say that MoD were past masters at wanting the BEST as opposed to what we could afford.

Personally I believe that whatever equipment our military and our SAR teams have they will have the character and ingenuity to deliver their very best. As far as I can tell we in the UK have almost made 'making-do' into an art-form.

G :ok:

[helihub]

So how does Bristow winning at least some of GAP-SAR affect all this?

[Flounder]

Crab -

You can train 4hrs per 24 hour shift if you wish to/are able to on an MCA aircraft contract delivered by CHC or Bristow (whoever wins this contract or the next).

Maybe you bit a little too quickly there. It was a baited hook with your name on it.


I think believing 6 contractors will end up involved is just a little daft and very far fetched. I know it could happen but it almost certainly won't.

Wednesday next week will show who's in for the next contract (Long/SAR-UK?), and I'm sure, as for GAP, the bidders will be whittled down as the bids are closely inspected to leave the usual suspects with perhaps one more for interest and the sake of fairness.

[[email protected]]

Flounder - I know it was bait but I didn't want to disappoint:)

Geoffers - you are, like me, a trainer and therefore must know that flying skills are perishable - no matter how good someone thinks they are, the fact is that without appropriately challenging and regular training, SAR skills quickly fade.

Being operationally current is one thing, being operationally competent is quite another. I'm not saying the contract has to include the roll-royce, gold-plated training solution - even I am not that naive - but anyone who believes that all the skill sets required to provide a world class SAR capability can be maintained on bare minimum currencies is deluding themselves.

[edwardspannerhands]

BBC reporting Bristows have the nod for the Northern SAR element of GAP.

BBC News - Bristow Helicopters to take over search and rescue work (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16869067)

[Savoia]

Although all the larger firms are now mutli-nationals I am personally glad that Bristows have won this. Their history of service with SAR work in general and with HM Coastguard is extensive.

All the best to them during this 'interim' contract.

[jimf671]

BBC reporting Bristows have the nod for the Northern SAR element of GAP. ...

That appears to be a leak from the northern point of the compass.

Which directions were the other leaks from?

Is this corroboration or recycled rumour?

[Tallsar]

Flounder..daft is perhaps too strong a word. No one said 6 real contractors either. Assuming CHC and Bris have the 2 Gap contracts, then it is more than possible that one of those 2 plus a new player could win one of the big contracts - I do agree though that 4 commercial contractors is unlikely. That means 3 commercial contractors will be involved in the transition.
My wider conjecture was based on seeing the 2 MoD SAR providers as two other players akin to contractors as far as transition management issues at working level are concerned. Hence my parenthesese against them in my earlier post. The party line from MoD is of course that they can be seen as one outfit, which is true from a legal, top level policy and contractural perspective. However, this is not so much the case when the single service views of the RN and RAF to managing their transition out issues are concerned, not least because of personnel and infrastructure issues at each base, never mind if other non SAR transition activity is happening concurrently... Think Lossiemouth and F35 for example.

I would also be surprised if we hear anything public and official next week about the SARH down select result. No doubt rumours will abound though... It is Prune after all!;)

[lightning_lad]

I see a report in the Shetland news website that CHC are to loose the contract for SAR next year, and Bristows will be back until the new contract for 10 bases is awarded from 2017, would this be for all of Britain or just Shetland?
Shame its too late to bring back Oscar-Charlie too!

[pasptoo]

Shame its too late to bring back Oscar-Charlie too!

Yes, and it's a shame we don't have any spitfires for the Afghanistan conflict.:ugh:

If you think a "call sign" is all you need to conduct SAR then please stay off this website, unless you have something remotely sensible to post. :}
SAR in Shetland has been conducted by some very fine people over the years, it just so happened to predominately be with an airframe registered as G-BDOC.

I think you will find "OC" has been at SUM since 2007, in the guise of an S92 ! G-CGOC. Perhaps the "new" SUM machine will also be "OC" in another form.

One thing for sure it is " unlikely" to be a 45 year old S61. :ok:

P.

[Manchester]

I hope you learnt from that Lightning Lad - never ask ppt a question before coffee time - he's always grumpy til then.

Or is it before teatime? I forget.

[jimf671]

New firm in rescue helicopter contract takeover | Aberdeen and North | STV News (http://news.stv.tv/scotland/north/296193-new-firm-in-rescue-helicopter-contract-takeover/)

[Scotsheli]

Would you be the same "jim" as confirmed to the Shetland News that no one would see any changes to the service at the "sharp end"? If so - how do you know?

Jurno alert chaps.

[jimf671]

Would you be the same "jim" as confirmed to the Shetland News that no one would see any changes to the service at the "sharp end"? If so - how do you know?

No connection and no resemblance and no journo.

I think Jim Ferguson has been discussed on pprune before. My understanding is that he is based in Aberdeen and the TV folk there regularly use him and describe him as an aviation journalist. Sometimes they seem to go to him for a comment when they are too lazy to look up Bond or Bristow or RAF Kinloss in the Aberdeen phone book. I checked on journalisted.com and there are various J Fergusons on there but none of them are aviation guys form Aberdeen.


Why am I here? Cos I hang onto big gas turbine thingamajigs in stupid conditions and have to tell other people how to do it. (Plus some history of def contract stuff, specifier of inland helo work, and per ardua ad astra.)

[Scotsheli]

Then jimf671, I apologise.

I am aware of the other "Jim F" and hence my question to find out which napp he dreamt his lastest facts up in....

Oh, and i'm loving "no resemblence"!

Scots