UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread

[Spanish Waltzer]

Any news on the 189? I see on another thread a debate over whether it will meet the Falklands contract timeline too. Don't imagine a 139 is ideal in that part of the world but I guess time will tell....

[500e]

No worry about Tetra either
FeaturesDetails (http://www.radioresourcemag.com/Features/FeaturesDetails/FID/595)

[Older and Wiser]

Spanish Waltzer

1st FI AW189 is on the AW Flight Line for final fit and post production flight tests. Acceptance starts in 30 days.

[Older and Wiser]

Belgian Navy NH 90 SAR Cab busy in British Waters.

Belgian NH90 First SAR Mission - Helicopter Database (http://www.helis.com/database/news/nh90_be_1sar/)

[Same again]

Only because the Lydd AW139 was conducting a winch of a patient from a yacht at that time. Can't be in two places at once.

[[email protected]]

Can't be in two places at once. No, that's why we used to have 3 flights on the East coast instead of 2 ridiculously far apart! And, not that many years ago, a second standby aircraft and crew.

Progress and faster helicopters make all the difference apparently...........lies, damn lies and statistics!

From the article By the end of 2018, the NH90 will definitively replace the legendary Sea King.
shame we didn't think of that!

[Al-bert]

Lossie, Leuchars, Boulmer, Leconfield, Coltishall and Manston I seem to recall - and all with a second standby :ok:

[[email protected]]

I was just harking back to the good old days - you are talking about the good old, good old days:ok:

[Same again]

Can't be in two places at once

Unless you are Crab@ of course....

[Al-bert]

I was just harking back to the good old days - you are talking about the good old, good old days

ah yes, that was prior to the last round of improvements! :E

[Ian Corrigible]

Flight: Bristow still waiting on AW189 SAR introduction (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/bristow-still-waiting-on-aw189-sar-introduction-416808)

Delays to their service entry have been caused by the slow certification of ice protection systems. However, AgustaWestland confirms that it has now attained EASA approval for its Limited Ice Protection System on the type. Validation of the more comprehensive Full Ice Protection System will not take place until the middle of next year, however.

I/C

[[email protected]]

Nobody saw that coming.............

[HeliComparator]

Nobody saw that coming.............

Yes it's certainly a problem that mil SAR has never had within living memory - since of course they haven't introduced any new aircraft in the past 40 odd years.

[cyclic]

I don't think we ever lost a job through not having full ice protection so it would seem a bit of an over kill - that was up in the frozen north. What limited icing capability does the 189 have? Probably more than enough to achieve the goal.

[jimf671]

I don't think we ever lost a job through not having full ice protection so it would seem a bit of an over kill - that was up in the frozen north. What limited icing capability does the 189 have? Probably more than enough to achieve the goal.

Yes, 189 with LIPS will be more capable than SK in icing conditions. I expect deiced a/c to be able to enter some mountain locations with considerably more confidence than in the past. Trip to Raigmore across the NW or return to base becomes simpler by just going up and over rather than long trip round Ardnamurchan or Durness or hours of hover taxi in a blizzard.

Time to hospital - tick the box.

Availability for next job - tick the box.

[[email protected]]

So you'll be able to tell us what the ice accretion limits on the airframe/Torque limits in icing conditions are then.

It's not just the rotor icing up that is the problem and just because you can control the shedding from the rotors doesn't mean you can fly safely in those conditions.

I know of 2 occasions (at least) where a Sea King was only saved by breaking cloud due to airframe ice accumulation - the rotor shedding was a minor irritation compared to doubling the AUM of the aircraft with ice.

Will they be able to fly in freezing rain or drizzle?????????? Don't think so for the same reasons.

[Margins]

[QUOTE]was a minor irritation compared to doubling the AUM of the aircraft with ice/QUOTE]

WOW, that was a hack of an ice storm, you would have been flying in there for a month!

P.S. Freezing rain or drizzle are not covered by any certification rule, there are no rotorcraft capable of that in the entire world.

[[email protected]]

P.S. Freezing rain or drizzle are not covered by any certification rule, there are no rotorcraft capable of that in the entire world. No, really????:rolleyes:

Doubling the AUM was just an indication that there wasn't enough power to keep the aircraft airborne with all the ice - it wasn't meant to be literal.

[Brother]

It seems that the 189 will not be flying SAR for sometime.

HeliHub Bristow UK to import four more SAR S92s in place of AW189s (http://helihub.com/2015/09/23/bristow-uk-to-import-four-more-sar-s92s-in-place-of-aw189s/)

[Same again]

Margins - I see that you are relatively new to this thread. The rules is that when someone posts something positive about Bristow UK SAR Crab counters it with a negative. When his negative post is questioned by someone with accurate or more factual information Crab posts lots of smilies and condescendingly explains that he was merely being sarcastic or ironic and that it was not meant to be literal.

Stick around for a while - you'll get the drift.

[[email protected]]

Same again - so you really think I didn't know that freezing rain and drizzle isn't included in the icing certification?

If I post something negative it is usually to counter a false or over-inflated positive. Jim doesn't understand that popping up into and dropping back out of cloud overland isn't that simple, especially in the mountains.

The fact is that the extra icing clearance above what the Sea King had will make a very small difference - if you are trying to get to a hospital IFR you still have to find some way of getting down - that takes time and then you still have to grope around underneath to get from the ILS/letdown point to the hospital.

Perhaps you would like to put some positive spin on how the 189 is so late for SAR service and the contract spec isn't being made.

Or are you too busy sniping at me to offer any real contribution?

[Same again]

Oh Crab... you disappoint me - I was merely being humorous :ok:;):}:8

[cyclic]

He is right of course, the let down will always be challenging unless the hospital/landing site is adjacent to an airport. Even Raigmore and ARI with relatively close airports will provide quite a challenge and then what do you do when you don't get visual at DA on the ILS? Go out to sea and let down? May have been better to come all the way at 100' on goggles...

[[email protected]]

Oh Crab... you disappoint me - I was merely being humorous You must have caught me in a shy and sensitive moment:)

He is right of course I think I might frame that comment from this august thread - and no I don't mean the month:ok:

[jimf671]

I am certain that the SAR Dep Ch Pilot who I recently discussed this with has a good grasp of this subject Crab. Anyway, Raigmore ~100' ASL and minutes from large sea area. Several other Scottish hosp similar.

[[email protected]]

I am certain that the SAR Dep Ch Pilot who I recently discussed this with has a good grasp of this subject Crab Then he will doubtless have told you that an IMC overwater letdown isn't a rapid process. You then have to deal with the conditions underneath as you coast back in which may be very different to what you left in the hills, possibly much worse.

Yes, a better icing clearance is welcome but it isn't a panacea for dealing with poor weather in the hills (or anywhere else). You still have to get to the job in the first place and I don't see them doing IMC letdowns into the mountains no matter how clever the aircraft is.

Will they be flying if there is a triggered lightning risk declared?

[Same again]

No. That's why we get paid lots of money. To make the right decisions.

[Vie sans frontieres]

In less than a week the last UK RAF SAR flights are due to close and an enormous gap in coverage opens up on the east coast. At the start of this process the DfT were gullible enough to be taken in by the ruse that Prestwick’s new aircraft and its ability to charge west to east across the country through icing conditions would compensate for the loss of Boulmer’s SAR cab. Yet for the next three months Prestwick won’t have a new SAR cab and when they do, questions still remain about airframe icing and its potential impact on an aircraft attempting such a transit. Were large super-cooled droplets not part of the discussion some time ago? As I recall the icing clearance was based upon the aircraft not flying through large super-cooled droplets. How one judges that whilst airborne is beyond me. Now we have this lightning risk threat thrown in to the equation. Notwithstanding the distance involved, it sounds to me as though Prestwick’s ability to cover Boulmer’s patch is not what was advertised. Sadly it is going to take an unspeakable tragedy of some sort for the DfT to realise the folly of this decision. When Humberside go u/s, which they will at some point, east coast SAR coverage is non-existent. Who in their right minds thinks that this is a good idea?

[[email protected]]

Who in their right minds thinks that this is a good idea?
everyone except you and me it would seem :ugh:

No. That's why we get paid lots of money. To make the right decisions. that depends if you think triggered lightning is a real risk inland or not - are you going to make your go/no go decision based on an unproven forecast? It is certainly not predicted with as good a certainty as frezzing rain/drizzle and SAROPS have been conducted many times in conditions which 'theoretically' could have induced triggered lightning.

[jimf671]

Nobody is suggesting IMC letdowns over mountains.

The distances involved in many of the alternatives in a Highland context make the time and care required for a safe letdown over the Moray Firth a reasonable approach.

Regarding the Inverness to Humberside gap, I do agree that it is a potential problem. I do not think that means that the 10 base solution is deeply flawed. I think that the 10 base solution is generally a good element of the first entirely plan SAR helicopter service for the UK.

The Inverness solution is good for me and very good for my team. However, particularly with my marine/offshore hat on, this part of the Bristow version of the 10 base solution may be stretching the concept a little too far.

Crab. I know you know and have worked with many of the guys and girls who are now out there doing it in CG-Bristow aircraft. Why don't you give them a ring and get the proper gen? Are they not speaking to you?

[pitch horn]

Crab , I can only assume you are fully conversant with the current amendment to the S92A operations manual having the type on your E.A.S.A. A.T.P.L.

[cyclic]

Jim, I can only use my two tours at Lossie as experience but I can't remember a situation where it would have been quicker to go over the top and rely on an unknown let down at the other end. As for letting down in the Moray Firth, it isn't as straight forward as you may think near the Beauly Firth end. With the correct low level skills (SAR basics) and goggles, a relatively fast transit can be made even in quite poor conditions. I'm not saying that a high level transit will never be used but it still won't be the best way on most occasions even with new technology. Before you ask, I have flown new technology in icing and snow without the pressure of a dying casualty and I know where I would rather be. Of course this relies on getting enough practice at low level and with goggles - Crab has done that one to death! I'm sure they will be fine with all the experience they have in place.

[llamaman]

Whether people like it or not, or are willing to admit it, there has already been a subtle shift in ethos of UK SAR Operations by the commercial operators. The military call it mission creep. In the past the priority was to get the casualty to a hospital, usually by utilising one equipped with an HLS. Already, we are seeing Bristow crews more frequently electing to drop the casualty at an airport for onward transfer via ambulance. This is a perfectly acceptable solution where injuries are not time critical and mitigates the issues of single-engine performance in urban HLSs. It may even be a quicker option than a low level grovel in marginal weather where the modern aircraft are equipped for a fast, IFR transit potentially in icing conditions (stand-fast AW189 clearance), assuming there is a slick ambulance transfer. The problem comes when there isn't a convenient airport and the weather or HLS isn't compatible with the best hospital option.

The numbers were expertly crunched to justify the 10-base solution. If senior members of the DfT had seen the map I saw recently which dramatically visualised the rescues carried out round the UK in recent years they would be very nervous about coverage down the east coast. Stats can be very forgiving when trying to justify a solution which saves money. I guarantee the press/public won't be as forgiving if and when said compromise gets exposed.

[[email protected]]

llamaman - excellent post - the quote 'lies, damn lies and statistics' was never more apposite than when looking at the way the 10 -base solution was 'justified' - sadly, some of that work was done by my own colleagues!

Pitch horn - I don't have to be S-92 qualified to know SAROPS - perhaps 14 years as Sqn trg Off, CFS agent and part-time Stds isn't enough for you.

Jim. the paranoia that exists within MCA and Bristow regarding social media and this contract means that no-one would talk to me unless it was off the record - obviously no-one has done so:ok:

[Vie sans frontieres]

Crab , I can only assume you are fully conversant with the current amendment to the S92A operations manual having the type on your E.A.S.A. A.T.P.L.

Pitch horn

Seeing as you probably are, perhaps you could confirm or deny that the icing clearance is based on the absence of large super-cooled droplets. How do you check that this is the case?

[pitch horn]

The point I am making is that there are people on this thread pontificating about an aircraft and its limitations ( as dictated in the Ops manual ) that they have absolutely no experience on.

Crab - your cv is small beer compared to many involved in SAR. I'm not just referring to the U.K. but globally.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Pitch horn

Seeing as you probably are, perhaps you could confirm or deny that the icing clearance is based on the absence of large super-cooled droplets. How do you check that this is the case?

Well Same Again must know the answer. Will he tell us?

[Same again]

I could perhaps look it up but don't have the time or the inclination. I am just a pilot. Freezing conditions are freezing conditions and, having been well scared one dark, stormy, winter night, I will stay well clear of the combination whenever possible. Especially if there is no quick and easy exit.

If you have a beef about the policies of UK SAR, MCA and Bristow then take it up with them or, better still, your local MP - not the crews who are trying to do their best.

[[email protected]]

I don't think anyone is beefing with the crews - just questioning headline statements about capabilities that may be exaggerated or spun to deflect any criticism for not fulfilling the terms of the contract from the start.

Pitch Horn - globally, very certainly but UKSAR, maybe not so small beer - it's irrelevant since the point was that I don't have to be S-92 qualified to understand icing limitations and SAROPs.

[Vie sans frontieres]

I could perhaps look it up but don't have the time or the inclination.

So you don't know or want to know the limitations of your own aircraft.

You previously mentioned meriting all that money you earnt. Hmmm.

[Same again]

I know all the limitations of the aircraft that I fly. As far as airframe icing limitations are concerned my own limitations would be exceeded well before - and will not be. Just off out to spend some of that money. Bye.

[Vie sans frontieres]

I know all the limitations of the aircraft that I fly. As far as airframe icing limitations are concerned my own limitations would be exceeded well before - and will not be. Just off out to spend some of that money. Bye.

Well, clearly not all the limitations. However, thank you for proving so many points in just one small post.

[[email protected]]

This is starting to sound like some Cat checks I have conducted - a question is asked by the examiner, a bold but vague answer is given by the examinee, some probing of understanding is undertaken and then evasion, obfuscation and deception ensues as the examinee tries to cover up the fact he doesn't know the subject.;)

[Same again]

Well I seem to have passed all my tests Crab. I'm still flying SAR and enjoying it very much thank you. How's life with you?

[llamaman]

Well I seem to have passed all my tests Crab. I'm still flying SAR and enjoying it very much thank you. How's life with you?

Nice to see it all getting personal thanks to the brave screen of anonymity that Pprune offers. I'd love to see you guys attempting to have a similar conversation face-to-face in a bar (that's where actual people meet and chat whilst looking each other in the eye). I don't fancy your chances Same Again, even if you are a very wealthy and knowledgeable SAR pilot.

[[email protected]]

How's life with you? very good thanks - still flying but without getting dragged out of bed at 2 am for a 3-hour pointless search in shi*e weather;)

Did my time, enjoyed it and moved on:ok:

[FC80]

moved on

If you say so :zzz:

[[email protected]]

I meant I had moved on from flying SAR not moved on from caring about it.

I believe that anyone privileged enough to be involved in UKSAR should care deeply about its quality of service and not just treat it like any other job where the paycheck is all that matters.

[cyclic]

Did my time, enjoyed it and moved on

To be fair, you didn't have much choice...:ok:

[[email protected]]

Not so - I could have stayed in to the very end which would have coincided with my normal end of military service.

If small-minded individuals want to claim a victory from excluding a very experienced SAR operator and QHI from the new service for voicing an opinion then let them crack on - it doesn't say much for the quality of the individuals concerned.

[airsound]

On 16 Sep, Ian Corrigible pointed us to a Flight Global report, which included this about the 189 AgustaWestland confirms that it has now attained EASA approval for its Limited Ice Protection System which makes it a bit strange that Agusta Westland have only now, 12 days later, released the news formally.
AW189 Limited Ice Protection System Receives EASA Certification



http://www.agustawestland.com/fnm-portal-theme/images/custom/ico_share.png



The system further enhances the all-weather capabilities of the new generation helicopter


http://www.agustawestland.com/documents/17633750/61710147/squared_medium_squared_original_AW1283_S.jpg


First helicopter in its weight category to receive ice protection system certification
LIPS permits flight within a known and defined envelope of icing conditions typical, for example, of the North Sea.
The AW189 is the outright market leader in its class with over 150 units sold, including firm orders, options and framework contracts


Finmeccanica-AgustaWestland announced today that the Limited Ice Protection System (LIPS) for the AW189 super medium twin engine helicopter has received EASA certification. The LIPS system will allow the AW189 to further enhance its all-weather capabilities, continuing the process to make the all-new super medium class helicopter suitable to operate in the most adverse and harsh environmental conditions.
Find the rest of it atAW189 LIPS Certification - DETAIL - AgustaWestland (http://www.agustawestland.com/-/aw189-lips-certification)

airsound

[[email protected]]

From the article The AW189 is the first helicopter in its weight category to receive an ice protection system certification. The Limited Ice Protection System (LIPS) permits flight within a known and defined envelope of icing conditions provided that the capability to descend into a known band of positive temperature is available throughout the intended route, typical of conditions encountered, for example, over the North Sea. OH, err just like the Sea King then...

and The LIPS system is available as an option and includes ice detectors, Supercooled Larger Droplet (SLD) marker, Ice Accretion Meter and heated windshield. The system does not require heated rotor blades and associated equipment, while the engine air intake heating system is already incorporated into the standard AW189 helicopter. Ohh errr just like the Sea King again with the exception of the SLD marker (whatever that is)

The AW189 equipped with LIPS retains the performance and procedures for Cat. A operations and has only limited restrictions in terms of low temperature and ice presence during IFR operations, therefore expanding the all-weather operating capability of the type. with the exception of the CAT A - it just sounds like another rehash of existing capability


Oh and I don't believe the 139, which will be doing the 189's job this winter, has even this capability.............

[Vie sans frontieres]

Perhaps AW could lend the Supercooled Larger Droplet marker to the S92 flights. It sounds like they could do with one.

[cyclic]

Oh and I don't believe the 139, which will be doing the 189's job this winter, has even this capability.............

Correct unless it has the extra kit.

[Self loading bear]

Several patents filed:
Rosemount Aerospace has 2:
patent 1 (http://www.google.com/patents/US6759962)
patent 2 (http://www.google.ca/patents/US6269320)
And edited: Agusta's own patent
Agusta (http://www.google.com/patents/EP2325083A1?cl=en&hl=nl)
SLB

[[email protected]]

Correct unless it has the extra kit. Do the SAR 139 s on the new contract have that extra kit and, if so, what is the kit and what does it comprise? Is it as good as the RIPS on the S92?

Presumably the SLD icing detector simply says 'vacate the icing environment' if it detects the presence of SLDs? You can usually see the formation of clear ice on parts of the airframe (aerials, wipers, ice accretion probe) it doesn't give any protection, just detection.

[leopold bloom]

According to the local news Chivenor is continuing on state due to a delay in the contract.

[Clever Richard]

Before certification of the LIPS the AW189 had an all weather capability. Now, with LIPS, its all weather capability is enhanced. Does that mean it can now fly in more weathers than the atmosphere can produce?

[[email protected]]

According to the local news Chivenor is continuing on state due to a delay in the contract. They should be on state tonight and handover tomorrow but that was last week's plan.

If the new service wasn't standing up at St Athan in time there was supposed to be a 2-week notice given as I was given to understand not a last minute plan B.

North Devon Journal reporting at 8:25 a 7-day delay in handover!

[extpwron]

Chivenor Sea King: Concerns over private Bristow Helicopters Ltd "validated" by switch-over delay | North Devon Journal (http://www.northdevonjournal.co.uk/Chivenor-Sea-King-Concerns-private-Bristow/story-27902660-detail/story.html)

[P3 Bellows]

So.......... A 7 day delay.

What can I say........... Nimrod AEW3.........Nimrod MRA 4 :ugh: still waiting....

Typical Lib Dem forgetting history again.

Get a grip.

[JerryG]

Sorry to be so very far behind the drag curve, but is it REALLY true that there are no longer any free-swimming divers left in the UK SAR world?

Am I alone in thinking that this is an insidious travesty?

[satsuma]

Am I alone in thinking that this is an insidious travesty?

Insidious Travesty would be a good subtitle for the subject matter of this thread.

P3 Bellows

Do the words 'Reputational Damage' mean anything to you?

[P3 Bellows]

Do the words 'Reputational Damage' mean anything to you?

Indeed. I think the AEW3 was probably a bigger delay and cock up than the MRA4.

[satsuma]

Indeed. I think the AEW3 was probably a bigger delay and cock up than the MRA4.

Top marks for irrelevance.

[Wander00]

Crab - sorry, I must be missing the point, but your story seems at odds with itself - glad you had a good party though - hmm, could be why today's typing not entirely cogent!

[[email protected]]

could be why today's typing not entirely cogent! yes, one of the reasons I removed the post later:)

My point was that the delay in taking over from Chiv was due, it appears, to petty politics and not through any lack of effort or ability (quite the opposite) from the team at St Athan.

No doubt the truth will out in the end.

[jimf671]

A week. Who cares. Tiny stuff in the big picture. Useful for lazy MPs and Councillors to get a few column inches though.


More importantly, what news of Boulmer?

[jeepys]

Crab,
You know the truth.
Please tell us all as it may shut the ex north Devon councillor up.

So, how was the party?

[[email protected]]

The party was excellent, a stunning location with perfect weather and an awesome flying display by Aerosparx! Who would have thought that night, close formation in motorgliders covered in LEDs and punching out pyros and smoke would ever get sanctioned.

As for the truth - I don't know what went on in the corridors of power but I do know that St Athan had dug out blind to achieve operational readiness in just a month after receiving the aircraft. There was some rumour about numbers of pilots but the RAF SAR flights have operated on the bare minimum many times due to illness, OOAs and FI dets without compromising safety or capability so it really doesn't sound like a level playing field.

To be honest, it sounds like a last minute knee-jerk reaction from someone in the chain - RAF, MCA, DfT - with little real reason.

Blaming the delay on Bristow is not fair or justified.

[[email protected]]

Handover completed at 1300 today - good luck:ok:

[212man]

Blaming the delay on Bristow is not fair or justified.

I think I may frame that....:ok:

[P3 Bellows]

I think I may frame that....

Well said 212. Do you think he is trying to make amends?

[[email protected]]

Do you think he is trying to make amends? a bit too late for that methinks!

Just trying to be even handed - There are plenty of things that haven't gone right for the start of this contract, some of which can be laid at Bristow's door, or that of the MCA or the DfT - but this was not their fault.

[jimf671]

I think I may frame that....:ok:

Cheaper if we get all 673 copies framed in one production run. :E :E

[mmitch]

Chivenor stand down report.
Chivenor Sea King Completes Final RAF UK Operational Sortie (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/chivenor-sea-king-completes-final-raf-uk-operational-sortie-05102015)
mmitch.

[kaitakbowler]

Nice to see at least one of the support staff got a mention.

Thank you, all who have manned this commitment over the years.

We may never see the like again.

PM

[[email protected]]

Facebook page with many pics here
https://www.facebook.com/Goodbye-22-Squadron-and-Thank-You-So-Much-887314388018260/timeline/

Video here
https://youtu.be/fdrYddajiAU


Note the report in mmitch's post highlights the activation of a 2nd standby - will we see that in the future?

[extpwron]

Nice video – and a good demo of how an ILB transfer should be done!

[jimf671]

Talking of which, Golf India and Invergordon Lifeboat doing 20 knots together along the Cromarty Firth a few minutes ago and GI broken off and now heading SSE (Raigmore?) squawking 0023. 20151010T1508A




http://hmcoastguard.********.co.uk/2015/10/two-rescued-from-sea-following.html

[jimf671]

Bristow Inverness:

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/inverness/718266/busy-first-six-months-for-inverness-search-and-rescue-base/

163 jobs in six months. :ok:

(Lossiemouth Q2 & Q3, 2014: 121, 2013: 127.)


390 jobs on the Main contract across all bases in spite of late intro of NVG at Inverness and late start at Lydd. The number from Defence Economics at Abbey Wood for 2014 Q2 and Q3 for the predecessor bases was 348. Q2 jobs have been on a slightly reducing trend since 2009.

The use of the term 'taskings' implies that their figure corresponds to the 'callout' numbers from Defence Economics rather than the 'incident' figures which are lower.

Anyway, it looks like CivSAR works. :E


Next question - Will we ever see proper statistics about UK SAR helicopter work in the future?

Next question - Will CivARCC work?

[edwardspannerhands]

Next question - Will CivARCC work?

With the MCA running the show? Your having a laugh!

(Re-arrange the following) 'a, brewery, they, organise, p#$$-up, in a, couldn't'

[Oldsarbouy]

Be interesting to see the breakdown of the callouts and how many persons were lifted etc. Also if callouts were generated on the slightest pretext to justify the new service as it seems rather suspicious that Lossie weren't that busy this year up to the handover.
Civsar is a bit of a misnomer, it's more like exMilsarCivsar!
Anyway well done guys it's an excellent start, fly safe.
:ok:

[[email protected]]

Surely MCA wouldn't overegg their number of callouts to justify their new service............;)

[jimf671]

Be interesting to see the breakdown of the callouts and how many persons were lifted etc. Also if callouts were generated on the slightest pretext to justify the new service as it seems rather suspicious that Lossie weren't that busy this year up to the handover.
...
:ok:


The Defence Economics (DASA) numbers always had a list for number of incidents and a list for number of callouts. It appears to be the number of callouts for the MCA/BHL numbers in the article.

One might speculate that differences in shift times and other details might affect how aircraft were deployed by ARCC but that would tend to be marginal. There will have been a few where R951 have attended only to be replaced by R177 on the basis of low light capability. Does that count as a job? :=

[jimf671]

S-92A, G-MCGY and G-MCGZ have recently appeared on the register. Suggestion of GY in Aberdeen and destined for Newquay.

These appear to be aircraft that Bristow originally had on order for offshore use in Louisiana. Just as well everyone in Louisiana is used to being short-changed. :ugh:

[Spanish Waltzer]

Any ideas on operating cost comparison between SAR S92 and SAR AW189? I would assume with Bristow now committing to put S92 into 2 of the original planned AW189 bases with the associated set up costs, it might make sense to leave them there and operate with 7 S92 bases with 15 aircraft and (in time) 3 AW189 bases with perhaps just 6 machines. This would also provide a saving on one airframe.

[[email protected]]

Since they don't have a single 189 on SAR duties yet, that might be a bit difficult to calculate.

[Spanish Waltzer]

Yes thank you for your valuable input crab. I think we all know they are not flying them on ops yet :zzz:

But, unlike in the military, such things can and are calculated as part of any contract development. But of course you knew that too. :ugh:

Let it go.

SW

[jimf671]

Any ideas on operating cost comparison between SAR S92 and SAR AW189? I would assume with Bristow now committing to put S92 into 2 of the original planned AW189 bases with the associated set up costs, it might make sense to leave them there and operate with 7 S92 bases with 15 aircraft and (in time) 3 AW189 bases with perhaps just 6 machines. This would also provide a saving on one airframe.

A couple of problems with that.

It dents the government's effort to turn Westland into a proper commercial civil aviation supplier so not likely to happen.

S-92 is Helibus but AW189 is heli-sports-estate and as such has its uses in craggier corners of the Kingdom.

[Spanish Waltzer]

Jim, I hear you on the first reason. I hope in time though you don't regret wanting a sports car in the mountains....sometimes big and heavy is better at coping with those nasty downdraughts!

SW

[[email protected]]

Except that once you start going down, a bigger helo has more momentum to overcome so less weight and a bigger power margin is a better configuration.

SW - I think they had a good idea about the costs of the 139 right up until it proved how little it liked the maritime environment at SARTU:) Some engineering issues didn't help either but those are the sort of thing you can only discover once the aircraft is in situ and in role - but you knew that anyway:ok:

[jimf671]

I hear you SW and I appreciate your point. However, I have been flown around the hills of Kintail in various aircraft from 2 to 12 tonne during the last three decades and the differences are pretty clear. I expect that the diversity of size and specification planned for the SAR fleet will be a positive feature. Of course, it's not like they will be deploying 350s or 135s in this case. The 189 is roughly the same weight as a SeaKing with monster power and advanced rotor technology. Am I wrong to expect such a machine to shrug off a fresh breeze but be a bit easier for pilots to manoeuvre in and out of a tight corrie?

[leopold bloom]

It dents the government's effort to turn Westland into a proper commercial civil aviation supplier so not likely to happen. You are a wag Jim.:O

[jimf671]

I did mention Inverness-shire in my profile so the sarcasm filter should have been operational.

Sorry for any distress caused. (Still not working!) :E

[lowfat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqTawOdIVAc

aqTawOdIVAc

[mmitch]

RAF ends SAR. Tribute.
Farewell to RAF UK Search and Rescue (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/farewell-to-raf-uk-search-and-rescue-15102015)
mmitch.

[Redhawk 83]

What are the manning levels at the Bristow SAR Bases? Are all bases single aircraft? If not single aircraft; is it two of one type (S92)?

[Redhawk 83]

Ok my cohort here showed in the thread that bases that are S92 are two aircraft.
Still have questions about manning; are both aircraft manned 24 hrs or is it one aircraft is the ready and the other is a backup with one crew for both? 24 hr watch? 12 hr watch? 8 pilots or more/less pilots?

[jimf671]

This contract has always been based upon the manning of a single aircraft at each base. No second standby is required.

As the contract process progressed in 2012, first one and then a second EC225 ditched in the North Sea during oil and gas crew change operations and the DfT witnessed the chaos that can occur when an entire type is grounded.

At this point the contract changed from being one aircraft per base and 'convince us of how many spares you need to maintain 98%' to two aircraft per base. If you have two aircraft per base then if one type is grounded, or otherwise not available, then you can redistribute aircraft and still have one aircraft per base.

Oh wait a minute, we have one type unavailable now. And we are getting eight extra aircraft. This is fascinating isn't it? :E

[[email protected]]

One question that is raised is this: Since the costings were based on the 189 and the S92 is more expensive, who is paying for the difference now that there are more S92s than the contract stated?

Someone suggested that the DfT would foot the bill (yes the taxpayer) but surely it must be the contractor since it is a deviation from the contract?

Some progress since milSAR - less shift plot changes since it is £1000 extra to get a pilot to volunteer for an extra shift. However, since it costs £30K in penalties for a flight to be off-state, there is plenty of room for people to ask for more before it becomes too unpalatable!

Any takers for a £10K SAR shift???? Commercial reality kicks in.......

[jimf671]

One question that is raised is this: Since the costings were based on the 189 and the S92 is more expensive, who is paying for the difference now that there are more S92s than the contract stated?

Someone suggested that the DfT would foot the bill (yes the taxpayer) but surely it must be the contractor since it is a deviation from the contract? ... ...
.


Now lets see. Who told them they needed to buy AW189s? Who didn't make them in time? Somewhere in that mess is your answer.

(Also true that Bristow weren't too sharp with their order process.)

[[email protected]]

I think they decided to buy 189s by themselves since the contract was for 2 types not 1. They can't lay that one at the feet of the DfT.

[Redhawk 83]

Ok folks thanks for the info and background. But what is the Bristow planned manning level for a base; for argument let's say a two type base manned 24 hrs?

[Norfolk Inchance]

Redhawk, a base will not routinely have a mix of airframes. Either 2 x S92 or 2 x AW189(eventually). If a type is grounded, then the other type will be loaned from a nearby base thereby maintaining the coverage, providing you don't have any aircraft in deep maintenance at that time. Each base has historically been manned by 4 x aircrew and 2 x engineers on a 24 hour duty period. You don't have a fixed crew system, personnel are completely interchangeable. Also you have a (generally) day working Chief Engineer, and when there are times requiring more intensive maintenance you bring your off duty engineers in on o/t. Roughly speaking you have 10 Pilots (6-7 Captains), 10 rear crew, and 10 engineers. Also a part time admin person and a labourer to maintain the hangar etc. Crews will on average work between 6 - 8 24hr shifts per month

[[email protected]]

6 - 8 24 hr shifts a month for £90K - that sounds like value for money for the UK taxpayer............

[Norfolk Inchance]

Blame the CAA; besides I remember on my last visit to the SAR Flt at Chiv how many personnel were there to support one a/c. There must had been at least 15 engineers, a couple of ops type people, and on passing down the corridor beyond the crewroom, each of those offices had a least two people in them. I estimated that there were in the region of 30-35 'support' staff for one flight. When one considers that generally speaking manpower is the costliest item in a business it is little wonder why the RAF and RN will no longer provide UKSAR. I remember a few years ago when I was still serving being picked up from BZN and taken to Benson by a Flt Sgt Driver. I thought he must be the duty SNCO with no-one else to go and fetch me. But no, the air force actually pay drivers £40k+ PA to drive a car. You could get a civvy to do that for £15k. Now that is a waste of taxpayers money

[Redhawk 83]

Norfolk thanks, that helps me. I was trying to figure out if it was a "touring" type job but sounds like a live there job (or ideally live there). I am surprised by the 24 hr shift since I always thought it would be more stringent than the FAA 12-14 hr duty rules (FAR Part 135 since once the passenger is on board via hoist it turns into that). FAA doesn't allow "on call" etc. Again thanks!

[jimf671]

6 - 8 24 hr shifts a month for £90K - that sounds like value for money for the UK taxpayer............

:eek:

Somebody please tell Senior Pilot that the sarcasm filter is on the blink again.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

But no, the air force actually pay drivers £40k+ PA to drive a car. You could get a civvy to do that for £15k.


In Iraq/Afghanistan/Syria/chooseyourownMiddleEastern****hole?

[kaitakbowler]

N I, The only person I ever saw with a Flt Sgt MT Driver (routinely) was Sir John Grandy. Unless it was a compassionate job I can't see any reason for that to be done by a Flt Sgt, normally a job for an SAC/civvy MTD.

PM

Sorry for the thread drift.

[[email protected]]

Blame the CAA; When did they start paying the wages for SAR crews then???

When the civSAR flights get pinged for umpteen secondary duties (that they don't get paid extra for) guard duties, detachments, OOAs, zillions of military currencies (weapons, survival, promotion courses etc etc) then you might be able to draw a valid comparison.

You won't ever match what was required for a SAR flight, even when the engineering was civilianised and the manpower cut drastically because the demands aren't there.

One job, 6 -8 shifts a month - sounds like the Fire Brigade......

TOTD - yes, a civvy driver in a war zone for £15K.... someone isn't living in the real world and clearly resents the military...

[P3 Bellows]

One job, 6 -8 shifts a month - sounds like the Fire Brigade......

I'm not sure why you are comparing a SAR flight to the fire brigade but I seem to remember you saying you did apply to be a "fireman" but they didn't want you. Perhaps they didn't have any firemans helmets big enough to fit your ego into. ISTR they only go up as far XXXL :ok:

[[email protected]]

I'm not sure why you are comparing a SAR flight to the fire brigade Er.. the amount of time off to pursue second jobs/indulge hobbies.

In my day we used to do 8 shifts a month, detachment to the Falklands, a week of Orderly Officer and fitness tests and still ask for more work.....:ok:

Have you got a bit of a thing about large fireman's helmets??????

[Sevarg]

Crab I think you'll find it's all to do with duty hours. The CAA lay down the rules as you well know.

[[email protected]]

No, it's the European Working Time directive that limits them, not for flying hours, but time at work on standby - each 24-hour shift is the equivalent of 3 normal working days, in theory anyway.

There is still discussion about whether time at home on call counts as duty time or not or if you don't get called out at night and are able to sleep.

[P3 Bellows]

In my day we used to do 8 shifts a month, detachment to the Falklands, a week of Orderly Officer and fitness tests and still ask for more work.....

Your my bloody hero :D

[Adam Nams]

Your my bloody hero :D


You're*


(if you had done CMT 1/2, ISS or some secondary duties then you would know that)

[[email protected]]

So P3, poor grammar and no ability to recognise humour...........

[charliegolf]

You're*

(if you had done CMT 1/2, ISS or some secondary duties then you would know that)

Or Year 4 of a decent Primary School.

[ericferret]

I suspect the EU working time directive does not apply.

Exceptions
You may have to work more than 48 hours a week on average if you work in a job:

where 24-hour staffing is required
in the armed forces, emergency services or police
in security and surveillance
as a domestic servant in a private household
as a seafarer, sea-fisherman or worker on vessels on inland waterways
where working time is not measured and you’re in control, eg you’re a managing executive with control over your decisions

[jimf671]

Change of subject.


If you had the chance to ask the Coastguard senior management a question about ARCC Fareham, what would it be?



[No Duff. No Play. No Duff No Play. H = 311000ZOCT15.]

[[email protected]]

How many people with aviation experience in general and SAR aviation experience in particular will he have working there?

I know of one, who is a good and well experienced chap.

Eric - EUWTD does apply - MCA are not classed as Armed Forces nor emergency services (that is just Police, Fire and Ambulance) as far as I am aware and the 24-hour manning would have to be of a non-sleeping variety.

They tried to impose it on the milSAR but the 'military imperative' card was played.

[Norfolk Inchance]

The EWTD is a 'nicety' to observe but it is not a show stopper. What matters is our FTL as laid out by the CAA. We do get quite close to that limit if you work 8 shifts per month with a night call out, where it becomes a 24 hr duty period.
Crab how many fitness tests do you do? When I was serving fitness tests were generally annual events as was your Annual PWT, WHT, etc. However what people did get time off for was daily Fiz, time for expeds and adventurous training, and of course 'personal admin'.
A major problem with the RAF SAR world was that once you were in it you rarely left it, and therefore with the exception of a quick few weeks hop down south, they didn't deploy. Bouncing from one flight to another isn't really what the mil is about, so civilianisation is the right option.
Whoever suggested i had a gripe with the military could not be further from the truth, but when you leave something, then take a closer look at how it really is, then you tend to see its flaws and weaknesses.

[[email protected]]

Crab how many fitness tests do you do? When I was serving fitness tests were generally annual events as was your Annual PWT, WHT, etc. my 'In my day' statement was an exaggerated joke - maybe I should have added some smilies or something:ugh:

A major problem with the RAF SAR world was that once you were in it you rarely left it, and therefore with the exception of a quick few weeks hop down south, they didn't deploy. Bouncing from one flight to another isn't really what the mil is about, so civilianisation is the right option. So, eventually after 10 years or so, you will have the depth of experience that milSAR had - that was the point, it was a service with a specialist core so that others could bounce in and out of it (and many did, despite what you assert) - any dilution of experience was minimal

What you have now is a very few moderately experienced people (standfast some of the rearcrew) whose experience is further diluted by those from SH, junglie, Oil and Gas and a number of others who claimed SAR experience from things like MERT and some with bare minimum (after trg) NVG skills.

Eventually, unless you get a lot of further changes, the experience levels will build but lets not pretend that that state will be reached in a few months or even a couple of years.

How many pilots in Bristow SAR have more than 10 years UK SAR experience (recent experience)? - that's what was removed by civilianisation.

[Norfolk Inchance]

I agree that Bristow has brought in many with very debatable experience, especially in rear crew with paramedics off the street with very little training. Also I am aware that there is a genuine concern regarding some of the Pilots who have been promoted, apparently because they need backsides on seats. However, SAR is not a dark art, you don't have to have seen every situation for one to be able to deal with whatever presents itself. It is better to have a sound base level, with a very healthy dollop of common sense and pragmatism, and take each job as it comes. I am definitely not suggesting that an O&G chap could be sent on SAR Ops without at least a year or two of Co-Pilot duties. There are some barely average O&G guys out there, but I have also seen a lot of extremely competent non-mil pilots, who take as much pride in their profession as many mil guys I have served with. A mix of backgrounds is invaluable; a Junglie would be excellent in mountains but pretty poor hovering over the sea with little references, whilst an ASW chap would find NVG a bit alien but drums a doodle.

For what my opinion is worth, the RAF should have cycled their crews through SAR every 2-3 years, with overlaps in the changeover dates- giving much more experience to the general RW community. This would be paying dividends with the RAF SH becoming more involved in the Littoral environment.

And the answer to your last is more than you probably think.

[Same again]

and fitness tests

If you actually passed the '5 mile march of death' Crab then I salute you. :D

[llamaman]

jimf671 wrote;

"If you had the chance to ask the Coastguard senior management a question about ARCC Fareham, what would it be?"

How will the MCA ARCC maintain a neutral stance when considering requests for helicopters from other emergeny services that conflict with a request from a coastguard unit (probably sat next to you in the National Maritime Ops Centre)?

[[email protected]]

Norfolk - 2-3 year cycle is impractical as you get rid of people just when they are becoming useful and give yourself a massive training burden.

Much transfer between SH and SAR wasn't possible, especially since Afghanistan, because the SH force wouldn't give up its crews (pilots or rearcrew) to go SAR - again because of training burden and also because they would never want to come back.

Most SAR isn't a dark art - right up until something a bit tricky comes up - think Carlisle floods or a quadruple ejection - then it is experience that comes to the fore - not just in terms of flying skills but in command and control and understanding how you interface with other emergency services.

The answer to my last is, no it isn't.

Same again - the CFT, as it was called, that I completed several times on exchange with the AAC was definitely more than 5 miles:)

Good question Llamaman:ok:

[Vespel92]

I agree that Bristow has brought in many with very debatable experience Well thank goodness you're there to keep them all right:ok:

The EWTD is a 'nicety' to observe but it is not a show stopper.
I would maybe read up on the EWTD bit prior holding your next SAR GOD masterclass:ugh:

[jimf671]

How many people with aviation experience in general and SAR aviation experience in particular will he have working there? ...


4 Controllers:
1 x ex-RAF, ex-NATS
1 x ex-Sea King rear crew
2 x RAF ARCC

Operators:
Largely ex-military, many aviation, some civil aviation.



Also:

Manager of ARCC reports to Deputy Chief Coastguard.

Work-up will include a visit to ARCCK and Inverness base in two or three month time.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

4 Controllers:
1 x ex-RAF, ex-NATS
1 x ex-Sea King rear crew
2 x RAF ARCC

Operators:
Largely ex-military, many aviation, some civil aviation.


Funny how TG was the only man on the recent training course at Shawbury with any aviation experience whatsoever. Maybe the other skygods destined for the ARCC will be on a separate course?

[jimf671]

Funny how TG was the only man on the recent training course at Shawbury with any aviation experience whatsoever. Maybe the other skygods destined for the ARCC will be on a separate course?

Also strange how the Shawbury course didn't seem to be on Dougie's radar.



A conversation about this stuff continues. Expecting to understand more about the chain of command, concept of ops and staffing over the next week or two.

[jetelectro]

What is wrong with our bloody helicopters

grough ? Team stops Coastguard helicopter rolling over in Ingleborough rescue (http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2015/11/16/team-stops-coastguard-helicopter-rolling-over-in-ingleborough-rescue)

;)

[[email protected]]

Embarrassing, but these things happen when you are operating out in the bundu. It could have been worse, they probably made the right decision to shut down rather than risk dynamic rollover which would have written it off.

[M609]

RAF Sea Kings sold for parts :E


http://imbo.vgtv.no/users/sa_/images/e022a0ad494afbf2250697ecd49a048a.jpg?t%5B%5D=900x506q80

Norway buys 2 ex RAF Sea kings for parts

Video (Norwegian) (https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAAahUKEwjz5bCd2JfJAhVECSwKHWEiD6w&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenbladet.no%2Ftv%2Fembed%2F%3Fid%3D1 00482%23!%2Fvideo%2F100689%2Fflygende-delelager&usg=AFQjCNGnZTtWGjBLHy2aodt-Bm_OS7R0Zw&sig2=fG916AXan6bEdhn-4CAH2g)

[[email protected]]

Finally - an overseas training sortie for the Mk3A fleet - just a shame it's a few years late and only a one-way ticket:ok:

[P3 Bellows]

Crab

Embarrassing, but these things happen

How is it in any way embarrassing?

You land; you experience vibration; you shut down.

Sounds like a very sound crew decision to me.

As I'm sure you are familiar,(with your vast experience) helicopters by their very design, are very complex pieces of machinery and things can go wrong when you least expect it.

When you say embarrassing are you now suggesting that there are engineering deficiencies in the operating company?Can't think of any other reason for you to describe it as such. Or are you just up to your usual? I'm sure it never ever happened to the RAF.

P3

[Al-bert]

I'm sure that Crab was merely describing how all we professionals might feel if we had to abort a life saving mission due to a technical fault; especially when equipped with the mighty shining new wondercopter?

The RN never feel embarrassment of course, goes without saying! :E

[satsuma]

P3

You're way too sensitive. Have you considered anger management?

[P3 Bellows]

You're way too sensitive. Have you considered anger management?


Ggrrrrrrrrrrr

[satsuma]

Have you also considered that there may be a connection between the slope and the vibration?

[[email protected]]

Oh dear P3......... that was a Pavlovian response - crab posts, must reply in angry fashion.

As ever reading things into my narrative that just weren't there.

This is the embarrassing bit “Conditions were wet and very windy, which may have caused a fault with the helicopter that then developed a strong vibration and could not take off, having to set down again. The helicopter was on sloping ground and slipped, tilting to one side.

Perhaps landing fully on a wet and slippery (and presumably boggy) slope wasn't the best idea when just dropping the rearcrew off for liaison/briefing from light wheel contact might have been an option.

However, you never know when an apparently sound surface is going to give way, especially when a 12-ton helicopter is vibrating on it.

The really embarrassing bit is that it had to be roped to the slope by the people they had come to help.

[llamaman]

I think it would be more appropriate to replace 'embarrassing' with 'operational hazard'. Those of us who have operated helicopters for any length of time, especially in demanding environments, know that sh*t happens. SAR involves putting aircraft into situations not normally experienced in most other operations.

Higher risk = higher chance of something going awry.

As the MCA, Navy and RAF have all proved over the years.

It's a bit lame to use this incident as a mud-slinging opportunity. The crew were trying to do their best on a somewhat sh*tty night.

[[email protected]]

SAR involves putting aircraft into situations not normally experienced in most other operations. I don't think wet and windy is exclusive territory for SAR helos.

It was never mudslinging and I qualified my opening word 'Embarrassing' with but these things happen when you are operating out in the bondu.

[500e]

Don't worry Crab I understood what you meant, P3 How about the pilot must have been P****d about his New cab giving trouble so soon, still better over land :E

[MightyGem]

The RN never feel embarrassment of course, goes without saying!
That's because they are too thick skinned to be embarrassed. :E :E

[leopold bloom]

Just out of interest, what are the sloping ground limits for the S92? Not having a dig at anyone, just curious.:confused:

[[email protected]]

I'd be surprised if there were any actual limits for sloping ground in a civilian RFM - maybe a recommendation in the Ops manual.

Anyway, if there were any, they might be about to be reviewed:) That S92 is clearly bogged in (in the photo in the other thread).

Maybe the clever counter-rotating weights in the anti-vibration system don't work in the rain;)

[Variable Load]

I'd be surprised if there were any actual limits for sloping ground in a civilian RFM

WRONG!

From Section 1 of the RFM:
Slope landing limits are 10° nose up or down slope, 13° left or right side of the aircraft up slope.

[P3 Bellows]

I'd be surprised if there were any actual limits for sloping ground in a civilian RFM - maybe a recommendation in the Ops manual.

Why is that? Oh yea, civvies no cok all about operating helicopters.

Pavlov :ok:

[[email protected]]

Oh dear - I was wrong - but not for the reason P3 automatically surmises:ok:

[Al-bert]

No MG

That's because they are too thick skinned to be embarrassed

Dartmouth training and Pusser's Ego issued! :E:ok:

[llamaman]

Quote;

I don't think wet and windy is exclusive territory for SAR helos.

No it's not. Landing in ad-hoc field locations on NVG in weather well below most operators' weather limits is somewhat challenging though.

The guys were a little caught out. Cut them some slack, most of us have been there if not somewhere close. I don't remember too many civvy SAR types jumping on Prune every time there was a slightly 'embarrassing' incident for military SAR.

I think people are getting a touch bored with the sour grapes from some quarters. Time to move on.

[jimf671]

From Section 1 of the RFM:
Slope landing limits are 10° nose up or down slope, 13° left or right side of the aircraft up slope.


And a contract requirement at Schedule 2.1 (Specification), 4.1.1.1.2, for 10 degrees in any direction.

[jimf671]

The stats are out today!

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/search-and-rescue-helicopter-statistics

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/search-and-rescue-helicopter-statistics-april-to-september-2015

[[email protected]]

Llamaman - not sure why you think it is sour grapes when I make a comment on something someone else has posted - perhaps you need to move on and revisit things I have posted with a slightly more open mind:ok:

Jim - pretty stat-tastic - excellent use of colour and pie charts;)

[llamaman]

Quote;

Llamaman - not sure why you think it is sour grapes when I make a comment on something someone else has posted - perhaps you need to move on and revisit things I have posted with a slightly more open mind

Crab,

I'm not sure if moving on and revisiting are compatible? ;)

[jimf671]

... ... Jim - pretty stat-tastic - excellent use of colour and pie charts;)


Yes, the DfT probably weren't sure if helicopter guys could do proper graphs and tables. :E

[[email protected]]

I'm not sure if moving on and revisiting are compatible? So you can't change your mind about something and see something old in a new light??;)

[[email protected]]

Jim - no indication of training hours flown though?

[jimf671]

Jim - no indication of training hours flown though?

Why would you expect that? :ugh: Rescues, searches and transfers are the outputs the British public and their servants at the DfT require and there are those numbers in glorious colour just as they were in the DASA reports in glorious black and white.

Some details like 'persons moved' that appeared in DASA reports are absent but not a great loss. The important thing is that reporting of key data about the work of DfT contractor SAR aircraft that has been absent since 1988 and criticised within the civil service and publicly since at least 1998 (NAO) is now to be regularly published in the public domain. Result! :ok:

The previous absence of public reporting has been widely and repeatedly criticised over the years. I can claim to have done my bit by raising the subject within the DfT/HMCG chain of command at up to AD level, with MPs, on the internet and in articles. What have you done about it Crab?

If you need more information Crab then please follow the instruction at the following address.
https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/official-information/

[Hot_LZ]

Doesn't apply to SAR jobs.

LZ

[Same again]

Never let the true facts detract from a good story.

[[email protected]]

Jim, the remark about training hours was meant to be tongue in cheek - maybe I should have use a smiley.

No, DASA didn't publish training hours since we always had so many available it wasn't an issue.

Now that training is limited and all the stats are available, why shouldn't they also be in the public domain?

There are a contracted number of training hours for the new SAR service so it would be useful to know if they are being exceeded (because the crews need the training) and, if so, who is paying for them.

[Pozidrive]

Latest news from the Cave Rescue Organisation. Pictures clearly show the side-slope, which must be very hard to judge from above, in the dark.


Helicopter Rescued | The Cave Rescue Organisation (http://cro.org.uk/helicopter-rescued/)


Helicopter Away! | The Cave Rescue Organisation (http://cro.org.uk/helicopter-away/)

[[email protected]]

Yes, looks a lot more than 13 degrees!

It is difficult to judge, even in daylight, which is why you use your AI to assess when to abort the landing.

[[email protected]]

Just out of interest, what is left of the RAF SAR Force has been rather busy lately.
RAF And Royal Navy In Dramatic Falklands Rescue | Forces TV (http://forces.tv/57613221#wuQFSsR8a6HrJvLI.01)

[Pozidrive]

Agreed Crab, hard to put a number to it just by looking. 13 degrees sounds uncomfortably high for a side-slope - it's about 1 in 5.5


And I think I would have moved the crane before take-off!

[tonkaplonka]

"Just out of interest, what is left of the RAF SAR Force has been rather busy lately.
RAF And Royal Navy In Dramatic Falklands Rescue | Forces TV"

Just to add, Bristow were also involved with their S92 assets but didn't get a mention.

[[email protected]]

Yes, I think that was hinted at in the mention of 6 helicopters but not specified.

The evacuation of a cruise liner has been long debated in the Falklands since they can have 2000 people or more on them - there are only very limited numbers of helicopters in the FI so it is just as well the S92s were there.

I presume they were used for winching and not just transferring pax from Cape Dolphin to MPA.

[Gwyn_ap_Nudd]

"Just out of interest, what is left of the RAF SAR Force has been rather busy lately.
RAF And Royal Navy In Dramatic Falklands Rescue | Forces TV"

Just to add, Bristow were also involved with their S92 assets but didn't get a mention.

So were BIH with their S61s.

[kaitakbowler]

"Bristow were also involved with their S92 assets but didn't get a mention."

The MOD press release gave due credit to both the "Eric's" and BI.

PM

[[email protected]]

Yes it does - here:ok:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-forces-go-to-assistance-of-stricken-cruise-liner-in-the-falklands

[tonkaplonka]

That's good. Nice to see everyone working together for a happy outcome.
Crab, I'm not sure if they were winching but two of the S92's have winches fitted so I presume they were.

[llamaman]

That's good. Nice to see everyone working together for a happy outcome.
Crab, I'm not sure if they were winching but two of the S92's have winches fitted so I presume they were.

One winching, one ferrying. A great result and good to see all available assets working together during a large scale challenging rescue. Would have been big news if conducted off UK shores.

[Fareastdriver]

What the hell would one want to cruise around the Falklands for?

[[email protected]]

The wildlife is pretty spectacular at this time of year but that is it!:ok: How much of it you can actually see from a cruise ship I don't know.

Oh and of course there is the incredible metropolis that is Port Stanley...........where the polupation doubles every time a cruise ship docks:ok:

Yes, a great job - shame it got so little press coverage.

[jimf671]

RAF News of 23rd October had a four page pullout feature on SAR Farewell.

A few well known faces from Lossiemouth, Chivenor and elsewhere, including ppruners.

John Prince is quoted as saying "Everyone on SAR should be presented with the AFC when they join - if you don't screw up you should get to keep it when you leave." Not sure there is a SOP for that at the Central Chancery of the Order of Knighthoods but I know what he means.

Some copies still in recruiting offices.

[leopold bloom]

Everyone on SAR should be presented with the AFC when they join - if you don't screw up you should get to keep it when you leave.
There wouldn't be many then ;)

[Snarlie]

There I was thinking SAR pilots drew satisfaction from achieving a difficult task and helping those in trouble. Now I see things are measured in column inches and medals.

[[email protected]]

John Prince was renowned for spouting pompous bo**ocks so don't tar us all with the same brush.

If you want proof, try and find the TV series about SAR he was in during the 80s.

[jimf671]

Happy flying with any of those guys.




And here is some pompous b0110cks for you.
https://www.youtube.com/results?q=STVDocumentaries+Rescue+-&sp=QgIIAQ%253D%253D

[lowfat]

Second search and rescue helicopter dubbed 'Cornish Sisters' arrives at Newquay Airport | West Briton (http://www.westbriton.co.uk/Second-search-rescue-helicopter-dubbed-Cornish/story-28212582-detail/story.html)

[cyclic]

See the boys and girls in the Falklands have been hard at work again. What is the HIFR capability of the 189 or will it not need to?

[jimf671]

... What is the HIFR capability of the 189 or will it not need to?

With an aircraft range of 600nm (AW) and a contracted minimum radius of action of 150nm, probably not.

Some have been casting doubt on the range/RoA of the SAR version but so far I haven't come across anything firm to suggest problems at the UK SAR Helicopter Service Lot 2 RoA of 170nm, so good to go for the Falklands 150nm.

[cyclic]

That's alright then! South Georgia here they come...

[jimf671]

:eek:




Feeling lucky? Hospital de Portvenir anyone?

[Self loading bear]

Distance Port Stanley - Porvenir/Puntas Arenas
487 nm
SLB

[Sevarg]

Add in 30 knot head wind, I'd go for Rio Grand. Who knows with a new boss there we might be welcomed.

[Self loading bear]

Rio Grande is approx. 370 nm
Safer for fuel reserve.
I guess they will let you land in matters of life and death.
Altough there is another democratic chosen boss in Argentina, they still roar when they are in economic down turn. This might slacken a bit now the oil exploration around the Falklands is not a complete succes.
However there might be a slight chance you have to leave the cab behind and take the airliner back. 😁😁

RGA - BUE - SCL - MPN. Make sure you take a few quit travel money with you or have your card loaded. Probably easier to fly to your head office to talk to your boss.

Cheers SLB

[[email protected]]

Heard a rumour that Bristow are going for complete S-92 fleet because AW189 further delayed.....

Not sure if that will also affect the Falklands SAR contract which is supposed to be using AW189.

Also heard disturbing rumblings about how some ex-mil pilots may have used some poetic licence on their CVs regarding glass cockpit time and SAR experience and that a potenial senior pilot had struggled to get qualified..........

Just rumours of course......nothing like that could be true.......could it???:E

[Adam Nams]

Not sure if that will also affect the Falklands SAR contract which is supposed to be using AW189.


I've heard that two have already been delivered.

[jimf671]

G-SAAR and G-FSAR are sitting in a hangar at Newquay (St Mawgan to you Crab), complete and making ready for a trip south. They are ITALIAN-MADE AW189 SAR version. :ok:

G-MCGY and G-MCGZ are at another hangar at Newquay doing the work-up to take over from Culdrose shortly.

G-MCGG is believed to have gone to Prestwick with Craig and all that Stornoway practice hasn't been wasted after all. :E

G-MCGL is brand new and believed to be at Dyce being wrapped in Christmas paper with Prestwick's name on it. :) More to come?


As posted by me elsewhere.
"Can you imagine how bad it is going to look for AW (Agusta Westland) if a second SAR contract is late because of problems with their aircraft? If they can make sure that the AW189 starts on time in the Falklands then it's all about Bristow. If the AW189 doesn't start on time in the Falklands then it's all about Agusta Westland. So how important is it to them that the Falklands aircraft are right?"


The fundamental resilience that the two types provide to this service has been important from the start. This was amplified in late 2012 when the DfT dictated the number of aircraft. On top of that there is the Government's need to make Westland a proper aircraft manufacturer. (Oops. Did I say that out loud?)

Major fail on the last point since the only AW189 SAR ready to go into service are Italian-made. :ugh:

If S-92A becomes permanent for the entire service then the service will be degraded in performance and degraded in resilience. It will be obvious that the Government has given the contract to the wrong contractor. You have to ask if the senior management of Bristow SAR had the rotor experience and the bare-knuckle commercial horse-sense to make the AW189 programme work on the available timescale. If they didn't then it really isn't all about AW. If they didn't, how does that compare with what was told to the DfT during the bid? :ugh:


(And don't take anything Bristow tell you about the Falklands too seriously!)

[[email protected]]

Having the aircraft ready to ship and having them operational isn't quite the same thing but we will have to wait and see - I had heard there was a further delay in the icing clearance due to the addition of an external handhold........I believe 1564 Flt are readying the contingency plans to extend if required - some fudging required with the Design Authority apparently.

[jimf671]

We have seen from the Bristow UK SAR experience why one needs contingency plans. In the Falklands, without the scale of local aviation infrastructure we are accustomed to in the UK, I expect there may be more than one level of contingency.

[Older and Wiser]

Crab, no icing issue with FI Aircraft. But they are LIPS not FIPS which BHL require and the FI aircraft have no requirement for an additional hand hold. Training is continuing with crews at NQY with no major risk to ISD.

Contingencies were required from both the Contractor and JFC by DES MoD. The contractor contingency is in place, you may have heard about the thought process JFC are going through for their contingency.

[[email protected]]

Understood, does that mean that the UK ones do have a problem because they do require the handhold and FIPS?

[edwardspannerhands]

Diverging (geographically) slightly, I see both Caernarfon and Humberside have had a couple of distance taskings in the past 24hrs (N.I. & I.O.M). I'm guessing Humberside got the latter because the Caernarfon crew were out of duty time.

[[email protected]]

So Humberside go to IOM.......where does that leave the rest of the East Coast for SAR cover????

Out of duty time????on SAR?????WTF?? Must be the brave new world.

That would surely count as being off-state and attract contract penalties wouldn't it??

What is their max duty time??

[edwardspannerhands]

Crab, I am not au fait with Bristow's ConOps, hence I said I was guessing at the "out of duty" time. It was a long old haul for Caernarfon. Likewise I have no insight into contractural matters so cannot answer your question on penalties etc.. (Maybe JIMF has the answer as he seems to have an inside line on these things)


Your point on East Coast SAR cover is however, most valid.

[Never Fretter]

Does this also not demonstrate the greater flexibility of modern, high speed RIPS equipped aircraft?

So just how fatigued were you allowed to fly CRAB?

[[email protected]]

Does this also not demonstrate the greater flexibility of modern, high speed RIPS equipped aircraft?
No it demonstrates that the UK SAR service is spread too thinly.

Never Fretter - as you know, fatigue is a very subjective thing to assess and varies from person to person and from day to day with those same people - however, when urgent lifesaving was required, it came down to the crew (not just the captain) to decide if they were fit to perform the rescue.

During the Gloucester floods, one crew flew 12 hours continuously - yes they were tired at the end but they didn't pull stumps and go home just because they were at the technical end of crew duty time.

Many mil SAR crews will have flown multiple jobs in a duty period - especially in the Summer or periods of very bad weather - the point of SAR was that you didn't operate like an airline, it was a military organisation which allowed self-regulation within broad crew duty limits and the ability of the crew or senior management to extend those limits if the situation required.

Have I flown when fatigued? Yes. Were the risks mitigated as much as possible by the crew? Yes. Did we have any accidents or incidents operating that way? None that could be directly attributed to fatigue.

Now the brave new world might see SAR differently and insist that it is conducted within stricter civilian rules and regs - if that is the way it must be then so be it but if it compromises the quality of SAR service and UK cover then not much will have been achieved by the contractorisation will it?

Edward - both NI and IOM were normal jobs for the flight at Valley so why would it be a long drag for Caernafon?

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the greater flexibility of modern, high speed RIPS equipped aircraft?


Just how fast could the Inverness or Lydd aircraft fly if en route to an incident in Humberside's patch?

[handysnaks]

Now the brave new world might see SAR differently and insist that it is conducted within stricter civilian rules and regs - if that is the way it must be then so be it but if it compromises the quality of SAR service and UK cover then not much will have been achieved by the contractorisation will it?


..and the only way you are going to be able to quantify that last sentence is by the number of lives not saved, searches not conducted or transfers not carried out, that you can prove would have been carried out, under the MilSar system.

Oh, and I suppose you can chuck in some cost calculation for good measure! :ok:

[[email protected]]

The only arbiter of relative success at the moment is the ARCCK but even that will disappear once it moves to MCA control.

ARCCK of course will not be allowed to comment but rumours abound about quality of service.

When the MCA are marking their own homework there will be little flow of information other than statistical breakdown of callouts.

[jimf671]

Just how fast could the Inverness or Lydd aircraft fly if en route to an incident in Humberside's patch?

Inverness? Modern world response from Prestwick, Lydd or Caernarfon. (West coast aircraft with deicing up over the top and let-down over the sea.)


The only arbiter of relative success at the moment is the ARCCK but even that will disappear once it moves to MCA control.

ARCCK of course will not be allowed to comment but rumours abound about quality of service.

When the MCA are marking their own homework there will be little flow of information other than statistical breakdown of callouts.

I hear you Crab. But the RAF were marking their own card previously and before 1979 there was no Fleet Air Arm connection whatsoever and before 2010 there was no MCA connection. No matter how well-informed you might regard yourself and former colleagues, only subtle back-room links were available to many involved parties. In spite of my own links, in relation to one important incident in the military SAR helicopter world I received reports through an aviator from another country.

MCA Aviation have started their new publicly available reporting system and I applaud that move.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/search-and-rescue-helicopter-statistics-april-to-september-2015
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/search-and-rescue-helicopter-sarh01
Even without that new source we know that the contractor is doing a sh1t load of jobs with some bases exceed the previous military numbers. Sorry mate, but the question that might have to be asked is what were the military doing that prevented tasks. The age and capability of the aircraft has to be questioned. That stretches back some years and stretches forward to next year in respect of 1564.

With respect to MCA Aviation at ARCC Fareham, I hope those here who have continued involvement will keep asking searching questions and keep up positive engagement so that we will see a 21st century approach to an important public service with the Open Government principle fully engaged.

[[email protected]]

Lies, damn lies and statistics Jim but if that floats your boat then fine - it doesn't tell you much apart from what jobs were completed.

You seem to believe the RIPS is the be all and end all but it only sheds ice from the rotor, any ice on the airframe will continue to accrete and that has often been the most dangerous as it adds massively to the AUM and you simply run out of power. A simple up and over in winter won't be that simple and if the job is overland, you still have to get down using ATC or a coastal letdown. And remember 139 and 189 don't have that.

There was a very free flow of information between the milsar flights and the ARCCK and comments and feedback were encouraged by both sides to improve the service - whether or not the same Form R system is implemented by the new service I don't know.

Because there was no incentive to keep information from outside agencies because none of it was commercially sensitive (being off-state for example) there was no need for fudging stats or obfuscation with the RCS.

Despite your optimism, I keep hearing negative reports about many aspects of the new service which I do balance against the fact that they are still rescuing people.

[jeepys]

Crab,

please share the negative reports so the better informed can either agree or put the record straight.

[[email protected]]

Nice idea but some of those people have careers and jobs to protect - so no.

[jimf671]

... remember 139 and 189 don't have ...

What?



... I keep hearing negative reports about many aspects of the new service which I do balance against the fact that they are still rescuing people.

That balance Crab: do hold that thought.

I could give you negative reports from CivSAR recently and going back a quarter of a century if I thought that there was any point when I know that people have taken things on-board and set on improvement and, as you say, balance against the fact that they are still rescuing people.

Likewise in the MilSAR, how many broken aircraft, bad comms, new boys making wise but restrictive decisions about their own capabilities, and my all-time favourite, telling us they had to leave the exercise early for an appointment elsewhere and then being spotted having lunch in a nice hotel (a bit obvious with something yellow occupying a large part of the car park visible from miles away).

Key to what is happening just now is new boys making wise but operationally restrictive decisions about their own capabilities. The knowledge pool for the Westland Sea King under military flying rules is immense but the knowledge pool for S-92A under CAP 999 and various OSR and so on is still small. Likewise, the knowledge pool for AW189 under the same regime is as yet non-existent and by Q3 2016 will still be mainly maritime.

[[email protected]]

They don't have RIPS - I thought that was reasonably clear - obviously I need to work on my syntax.

Leaving an exercise is hardly making a restrictive decision about the crews capabilities. calling in a flight from the other side of the country to do a job in your own patch, is.

You keep forgetting that the whole concept of the new SAR service was that it would be no less capable - not by the end of the contract but at the beginning. The experience levels are rather variable; there is no LCR to CR syllabus and training budget to address that and the amount of training in role on the new aircraft seems thin.

[jimf671]

I have no idea about the 139 spec but 189 LIPS is certified, and 189 FIPS in the loop for cert this winter. LIPS (w/o rotor heat?) is fitted to BIH FISAR aircraft, and the cert conditions are reportedly pretty good.


My main concern regarding training is the long term future for the lads down the back. I still believe that the CAA has missed an opportunity to create a world-class system for SAR rearcrew by having it as a licensed aviation trade that would have produced the sort of standards that MilSAR have developed across generations of bouncing winchies off boats and rocks.

[jeepys]

139's on the south coast at Lydd are Lips and the two St. Athan are Fips (full ice protection).

Crab, yawn yawn.

[Thomas coupling]

And still the wheels keep turning...............................:zzz:

[satsuma]

'telling us they had to leave the exercise early for an appointment elsewhere and then being spotted having lunch in a nice hotel'




You didn't get the hint then?

[[email protected]]

Jeepys - ISTR that LIPS is no better than a Sea King icing protection and that there were lots of problems with the cables in the blades with the FIPS - perhaps that has been sorted out now.

Still no comeback about some pilots SAR and glass cockpit experience and a struggling chief pilot though...

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Inverness? Modern world response from Prestwick, Lydd or Caernarfon.

...except in this case, Caernarfon were already tasked and Prestwick haven't yet entered the modern world. Even when they do, Prestwick will remain one of the busiest units meaning that scope to help out on the east coast will be limited.


(West coast aircraft with deicing up over the top and let-down over the sea.)


Thanks:ok:


Sorry mate, but the question that might have to be asked is what were the military doing that prevented tasks.


Not logging 'stand-downs-before-airborne' as SAROPs?

[Same again]

Well I have heard it all now. A Crab lecturing us all on the flexibility of Crew Duty Time. Laugh - I nearly cried.

[Ian Corrigible]

... remember 139 and 189 don't have ...
What?
Sufficient manoeuvrability to 'mix it' with F-15s? :E

Rescue pilot 'rolled' helicopter to avoid USAF F15 jets - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-35070124)

I/C

[P3 Bellows]

Sufficient manoeuvrability to 'mix it' with F-15s

I wonder if the background of the airprox board Chairman had anything to do with the fact that there was low or no risk of collision.

Civilian pilot says the risk was high; mil pilot says risk was negligible.

I've read this sort of comment a lot in reports so it does make you wonder.

What were they doing "just" avoiding a SAR op for anyway? Rubbernecking?:ugh:

[jimf671]

Sufficient manoeuvrability to 'mix it' with F-15s? :E


Ha Ha :p


"If the S-92 is ‘Helibus’ then the AW189 is expected to be heli-sports-estate: fast and manoeuvrable, with plenty of room in the back for hill stuff." :ok:

[jimf671]

I wonder if the background of the airprox board Chairman had anything to do with the fact that there was low or no risk of collision.

Civilian pilot says the risk was high; mil pilot says risk was negligible.

I've read this sort of comment a lot in reports so it does make you wonder.

What were they doing "just" avoiding a SAR op for anyway? Rubbernecking?:ugh:


Quite.

From NOTAM (TDA) as quoted in AirProx2015121: "PILOTS ARE URGENTLY REQUESTED NOT TO FLY IN OR NEAR THE AREA WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF AERONAUTICAL RESCUE AND COORDINATION CENTRE"

[jeepys]

Crab,
I know a lot of the ex mil pilots do not have much if any glass experience but I am sure they will be fine!

[[email protected]]

Jeepys, it is the lack of real SAR experience that I find worrying (and the fact that some appear to have been less than truthful about that).

It was Bristow who were specifying glass cockpit time and they made a big deal about it but most people (even me) get used to it very quickly.

What were they doing "just" avoiding a SAR op for anyway? Rubbernecking They knew the TDA was there and their route avoided it - don't see a problem, especially since the Helo wasn't in the TDA at the time of the incident.

Same again - how nice, I seem to have my very own internet troll.............

[P3 Bellows]

They knew the TDA was there and their route avoided it - don't see a problem,

No................ You I guess you wouldn't :rolleyes:

[[email protected]]

If you read the airprox http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2015121.pdf you will see that no-one else thought it was a problem either - someone being a bit precious perhaps?:)

[Same again]

Just checking in now again again Crab to see how sour your grapes are. Don't really have much time for trolling unless, of course, I have downed tools due to FTL limits or icing restrictions and have to go on holiday to spend all the money that Bristow are paying me. How are things in the Corporate/Offshore centre of excellence that you seem to be running these days?

[jimf671]

The NOTAM does say "in or near".

And surely if you are in a F-15 doing tactical dodging about stuff at XXX knots through the corries it must be possible to imagine that you present a far greater risk than say a C-130 lumbering past at 5500 feet.

[[email protected]]

If you want a bigger area of safety you just make the TDA bigger.

The crews saw each other, the TCAS noted their presence and there was a very low risk to either - the heli pilot just overreacted, the estimate was no closer than 500' vertically - you could have that IMC in a procedural hold and no-one airproxes that.

A 4-ship formation takes up a lot more airspace and is less manoeuvreable than a C130.

Same again - Not just a troll then - an ocean-going **** as well - I bet they love you in the crew room on shift :ugh: please feel free to fill in the missing letters:ok:

[Same again]

I have no problem in the crew room, the aircraft or anywhere else Crab. Possibly because the selection team did a good job in recruiting crews for UK SAR and we did not inherit any 'SAR Gods'. We all seem to get along just fine thank you.;)

[[email protected]]

Possibly because the selection team did a good job in recruiting crews for UK SAR and we did not inherit any 'SAR Gods' oooohhh so pointed and hurtful :D back to the playground......

You know they say that if you don't know who the d*ck is in the crewroom......it's you;)

[jimf671]

Poor Crab. :sad:

He's obviously missing SAR so much.

[Al-bert]

I spent a very happy and satisfying 22 years flying yellow Wessex and Sea Kings (after two tours of green Wessex). Judging from the 'banter' of late I'm glad I retired when I did - the latest cr@p from certain ex players is pathetic. :=

[[email protected]]

Not if same again is a typical example of the workforce - fortunately I know he isn't:ok:

[P3 Bellows]

the latest cr@p from certain ex players is pathetic.

Well said. I just think it's all a bit sad really. Probably better to be remembered as a good operator rather than what is portrayed here. :sad:

[[email protected]]

Albert - perhaps if your posts were constantly met with personal abuse or derogatory comments, you might get a bit bored with it and react in kind since it seems to be the only language some understand here.

I had my say about civilianising SAR and, apart from some reasoned arguments to counter, most of the replies have been unpleasant whether on a personal or professional basis - all from people who don't know me and have never worked with me.

Happy Christmas to all:ok:

[Same again]

I had my say about civilianising SAR

Unfortunately you have had your say on numerous occasions which is why you (and not me) are the object of derision in many crew rooms. Anyone who has done the same job for 30+ years needs to be proficient, if not rather good at it, and I have no doubt that you are. But we do not need to hear it time and time again.

You don't fly SAR anymore and it has moved on so you are effectively an armchair expert.

[lowfat]

Hope this thread dies after 1st jan when there is only civil sar.
A nostalgia Mil Sar thread might be a good idea perhaps with a better karma..
Give it 6 months and people will have forgot there ever was a Mil Sar.
People are fickle.

[jimf671]

The implementation phase is scheduled to be complete on 1st july 2017. :E


Between 1st Jan 2016 and then there are four things due to happen.

- AW189 (aka The Westland Affair Mk XIII) :ugh:

- NVG for Stornoway and Sumburgh :ok: ... ... :suspect:

- GAP to MAIN contract changeover at Lee and Sumburgh (1st Apr 2017) then Stornoway (1st Jul 2017) :ok:

- End of service at Portland (30th Jun 2017) :sad:

[lowfat]

thats my point Jim... Its all Civilian...

Perhaps then in the words of the Disney song so people can:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk

moSFlvxnbgk

Let it go...

[jimf671]

There are two contracts split between two contractors in a way that means there are effectively three providers under two regulator regimes. :confused:

Effectively, this is still almost as much of a very British mess as it was ten years ago. :ugh:

In Q3 2017 it will be sorted. The first entirely-planned SAR helicopter service for the UK. :ok:

[Al-bert]

The first entirely-planned SAR helicopter service for the UK.


great..........what could possibly go wrong? :E

(It's sar Jim, but not as we know it! :8)

[jimf671]

great..........what could possibly go wrong? :E


Everything! Which is why 2495 posts might not be quite enough. :eek:

[ericferret]

Watched the link Lowfat not having seen the film. Best thing on this thread!!!!

[Al-bert]

2495 posts might not be quite enough! ;)

[OafOrfUxAche]

When was the incident shown in the clip? I can see it was in the northern Cairngorms but I'm not sure if it's a dig at the RAF not being able to attend because their helicopter was broken, or a pop at Bristow for being unable to do night mountains?

[[email protected]]

thats my point Jim... Its all Civilian... no, it's mostly ex-military which is the only reason it stands a chance of succeeding. But most of those in it agree it will take a couple of years to get to where it needs to be - so much for no lesser service at the point of handover.

[zic]

John,

FFS put the keyboard down and step away from the computer. Give it up, you are not only tarnishing your own reputation but also that of your former RAF and AAC colleagues. I went for a job interview the other day and mentioned that I was taught to fly the Lynx at SAAvn. The interviewer then asked whether I knew Crab@, and had to spend the next 20 mins extolling the virtues and limitations of military aviation and its relevance to the civilian world.

Thanks champ.

:D

[jimf671]

Crab, it's not the same. It was never going to be the same no matter what happened. :{

I would say that it is already of equal value overall through the reliability of the aircraft and the raft of excellent modern kit.

Two or three years from now I fully expect that it will have put all that old fogey yellow rivet-bag stuff completely in the shade. What we, who hugely respect the work that has been done by MilSAR across 60+ years, really do not need during that period is to have you forcing us to cast that service in a negative light when it is just not necessary. :=

It's over. It was good. It was heroic. It was yet another British military triumph of skill and determination overcoming idiotic bureaucracy and rubbish kit. "The floppy, carbon-based, ape-descended life-forms in the green onesies" made it happen. :ok:

Tomorrow is another day. A day of powerful engines, glass cockpits, double winches, computer mission systems, satellite comms, huge downwash, short servicing periods and a decent cab heater. :ok:



In 2016, a few things need to happen to ensure that the work of your generation of British military SAR practitioners is not just adequately respected but also competently developed.

The new incarnation of the Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre needs to be competent. It won't be the same either. It will have some new fancy kit and new people in a new location. Many of us remain concerned about the change. Of course, like the helicopter service, the old way was good but it wasn't perfect either, and it is only fair that matters related to the new centre are considered in that light.
The Yeovil/Bristow AW189 needs to get sorted.
It would be good if the AW189 situation does not distract Bristow from introducing NVG early at the two bases with the most darkness!



In 2017, three bases change contract and one closes.


Beyond 2017, we need to keep making noises about how the next generation of civilian SAR Technical Crew are trained. Should this be a licensed aviation trade?