UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread

[satsuma]

Can I give examples? At the risk of repeating myself, kitting, manning, training, infrastructure and aircraft development.

Is it offensive to make money? Perhaps it is when it's people's misfortune that you're making it from. Double that level of offensiveness when you're replacing a publicly funded service that is a necessity for the population as a whole.

Identify the difference between luxuries and necessities and you find the demarcation line between offensive profit and inoffensive profit. Postage, keeping your home warm, train travel: all necessary public services, all privatised, all much pricier than they used to be and all now run with the primary responsibility towards shareholders who don't give a sh1t about the person who relies on those necessities. All they care about is the return on their investment and it is to shareholders such as these that any provider of a privatised SAR service must also answer. And what suffers? Kitting, manning, training etc.

[nowherespecial]

OK, in turn then:

What kit do you not have which you should have and did have as an RAF SAR service?

How are you poorly manned?

Why is the 189 a poor ac?

What infrastructure do you not have which you had as RAF SAR?

Name some of the luxury vs necessities you are losing out on in this transition?

Some selective examples there of things which went up in price me thinks, they were run at a huge loss and the government/ taxpayer doesn't want to subsidise them anymore.

Do you have a private pension? If not now you will do soon. Profit is what funds pensions. If you don't like capitalism, I'm sure UT Air are recruiting in Moscow.

[[email protected]]

Perhaps consider the extra risks that non-licensed mil pilots have been willing to accept in order to save lives (sitting committed in the hover when winching to a restricted site or hover-taxying up mountains in cloud for example) knowing that generally the worst they could expect if their actions were not seen as reasonable would be a slap on the wrist.

If the CAA take a dim view of a pilot's actions, it is his licence and therefore livelihood that is at risk - will there be a conflict of interests there?

Will the CAA baulk when they realise how much SAR work has no chance of meeting PC1 or even PC2 standards, especially at night?

Who will carry the can if a non-licensed winchop, using AHT on a vessel or similar structure because the pilot's references are poor, manages to get close enough for a tip-strike?

Claiming that new and whizzy helicopters will make SAR better and more efficient is just a facade - yes you can get there quicker and easier and a better icing clearance will help with that but the vinegar stroke of many SAROps is a manual hover with visual references and neither of the new helos has a pilot's window that opens so you don't have to view those references through rain streaked perspex - a little fold-down peephole just isn't good enough, especially in the dark.

UKSAR could have been made a not for profit organisation when removing it from the military, an option that doesn't ever seem to have been considered.

[snakepit]

UKSAR could have been made a not for profit organisation when removing it from the military, an option that doesn't ever seem to have been considered.


That's exactly how it was being run, at huge expense to the British tax payer, by the MOD?! I don't see any way you could have removed it from the MOD, re-equipped the whole force, changed everyone's Ts&Cs, licensed the whole organisation so it could operate, save money, then ask the operator to do all that for a big thank-you after 10 years. :ugh:

All that would have happened is the same bidders would have submitted the same solutions but akin to the way Defence Estate services operate. I.E. The upfront risk would have been passed on to the D of T by way of massively inflated bids. No profit here guv'nor honest!

[CAR42ZE]

Perhaps consider the extra risks that non-licensed mil pilots have been willing to accept in order to save lives (sitting committed in the hover when winching to a restricted site or hover-taxying up mountains in cloud for example) knowing that generally the worst they could expect if their actions were not seen as reasonable would be a slap on the wrist.

The worst was a slap on the wrists, huh? I tell you what - any day of the week give me a ride with any pilot who cares about losing his job versus a pilot who is suffering from a case of deluded grandeur that they are the worlds greatest gift to aviation. SAR is not a place for a stick jockey.

fhfJDq_I1HA


Claiming that new and whizzy helicopters will make SAR better and more efficient is just a facade - yes you can get there quicker and easier and a better icing clearance will help with that but the vinegar stroke of many AROps is a manual hover with visual references and neither of the new helos has a pilot's window that opens so you don't have to view those references through rain streaked perspex - a little fold-down peephole just isn't good enough, especially in the dark.


Are you saying you used to stick your bollard out of the cockpit window of the Sea King to maintain a visual reference? Seriously clutching at straws to say a properly trained pilot can't maintain a hover by looking through a bit of plastic.

[[email protected]]

SAR is not a place for a stick jockey actually, in many cases, it is - that is if the casualty wants to get rescued of course. No-one is saying you have to be reckless or irresponsible, just prepared to put your life (and those of your crew) at some risk (mitigated as much as possible) in order to save the lives of others in peril - that is what SAR is about.

Try sitting 40' from a vertical mountain slab in the dark and rain, in and out of cloud trying to establish a stable winching platform (oh did I mention the gusty wind?) and then tell me you would rather look through either a peephole or a curved perspex window with no wipers (no distortion there then) when a simple sliding cockpit door gives you uninterrupted views of your hover references (usually in the 2 - 3 o'clock). Try doing it to a night deck that is moving plus or minus 30' in any direction and you will find that clarity of vision becomes very important.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Are you saying you used to stick your bollard out of the cockpit window of the Sea King to maintain a visual reference?


Well, that has been done...:oh:


How many hours flying are included on the aircraft?


Everything I have seen (and I admit I haven't followed every twist and turn) suggests that training hours will be in much shorter supply with Bristow than has been the case in RAF SAR. Is this a surprise? No. Will this limit the ability of crews to carry out varied training at a variety of locations, thereby reducing somewhat the crews' proficiency? Probably. Will this make a show-stopping difference? Probably not.

Much like the outcome of today's referendum, noone knows precisely how it will turn out yet. Time will tell, at which point some people can bang on about how prophetic they were and others can prepare to wipe Edwina Currie's salmonella-carrying foodstuff from the front of their heads.

[Al-bert]

and the Wessex had an even better stick jockey window than the Sea King - so big you could climb through it! Tell that to the kids of today.......:}

ps what exactly is a 'stick jockey'? Was I one? Why did I come in here - nurse! :8

[Sumpor Stylee]

If the CAA take a dim view of a pilot's actions, it is his licence and therefore livelihood that is at risk - will there be a conflict of interests there?

Will the CAA baulk when they realise how much SAR work has no chance of meeting PC1 or even PC2 standards, especially at night?

Who will carry the can if a non-licensed winchop, using AHT on a vessel or similar structure because the pilot's references are poor, manages to get close enough for a tip-strike?

Crab,

you still haven't grasped that civ SAR have been taking calculated risks of the nature you refer to for years but the CAA accept the risk v reward judgement of crews and the whole thing has been very successful. It won't be the CAA the individual will be worried about if they make a bags of it, more the lawyers in the subsequent board of inquiry......

[satsuma]

How are you poorly manned?

Pages 48 and 49 of this discussion make reference to a manning problem that is developing.

Why is the 189 a poor ac?

As far as SAR goes, it isn't even an aircraft yet!

Name some of the luxury vs necessities you are losing out on in this transition?

You've missed the point - hugely.

If you don't like capitalism, I'm sure UT Air are recruiting in Moscow.

I don't think they're communists anymore.

Seriously clutching at straws to say a properly trained pilot can't maintain a hover by looking through a bit of plastic.

A pilot who is taking just a one eighth share of 50 training hours per month per unit will hardly be able to conduct sufficient quality continuation training to meet such challenges.

[dingo9]

Preparing to be shot down, but ... 50hrs per month per base, 5 crews per base ? 10 hrs per crew per month. Spread over average of 8 shifts, 1hr25min per shift. Sound reasonable?

[jeepys]

Seriously clutching at straws to say a properly trained pilot can't maintain a hover by looking through a bit of plastic.

Satsuma,

I am not sure whether you are aware that civvies have been flying SAR for over 40 years. Yes I know the RAF/RN had an abundance of flying training hours but there is always a lot more circulation within the forces as people move on and new crews move in. Civvy SAR is not like that.
I am not sure of your ability and maybe you think based on your experiences that 50 hours is far from the mark required to keep a crew competent but I think the civvies do quite a good job with their training hours.

How do you know the 189 is no good for SAR if there is not even a SAR 189 built yet? Perhaps you had better let Agusta know your secret.
It may turn out to be a poor platform but we don't know yet. It's like me telling everyone you are a s*!t operator. I have never even met you, or have I!

[Vie sans frontieres]

No way. There are too many aspects to SAR for 10 hours per month to be sufficient. Standard decks, downwind decks, left to rights, right to lefts, trapped decks, RIBs, hi-lines, multi-seat dinghies, wets, ejectees, sits, IEC sits, drums, extended cable drums, AHT, navigation, GH, radar let downs, mountains - all by day and by night.

How can ten hours per month be enough for that - especially when pilots have IF stats to complete as well? SAR can be a risky business and serious skill fade afflicts even the most experienced of operators.

[dingo9]

Care to put a number on that to fulfil those currencies ?

[Vie sans frontieres]

To stay on top of things, SAR aircrew require at least 20 hours training per month, preferably 25.

[[email protected]]

Especially when you factor in how little experience on type in role many of those crews will have - building hours ferrying in the N Sea is not in any way the same as operating the aircraft in the SAR role - with so few training hours it is going to be on-the-job training which is not actually training (where you make things tricky for yourself to build skills) it is just getting the job done and pretending these are quality training hours.

Yes, a trained pilot can hold a hover looking through a piece of perspex, but how accurately? Within 6 inches or so when you have a winchman trying to get to a casualty 200' below you - there is hovering and there is precision hovering - the latter takes the best references available, especially in shi*e conditions.

Perhaps the 189 will be as good in the maritime environment as the 139 - oh dear, how long did they last at Valley?

[Flounder]

How can ten hours per month be enough for that - especially when pilots have IF stats to complete as well? SAR can be a risky business and serious skill fade afflicts even the most experienced of operators.

If 20-25 hours a month is the requirement to deliver competency on the quoted wide variety of SAR skills could one of the RAF/RN pilots please divulge their annual total of flying in SAR for the last 12 months.

I estimate based on 25 hours/month with taskings on top I would expect you must be flying about 450-500 hours a year? Is this correct?

10 hours/month is too simplistic a calculation not taking in to account leave, sim training and various other commitments that remove a crew member from his/her flying duties. The estimated work pattern for BHL crew is 7-8 shifts a month restricted by FTL and ultimately the WTD of 2000 hours. This equates to about 15 hours a month, with taskings on top you're looking at roughly 25 hours a month. If that's flown over an average of 7 shifts in the month you're in the air for over 3.5 hours per shift. That doesn't sound insignificant to me. In fact it almost exactly reflects my own flying for the last 12 months having taken my full compliment of leave and 2 sim trips.

Flying in a civilian SAR unit I have never taken note of how many hours there are remaining for training that month. I don't know any crew who has and even if they did I firmly believe they would go training anyway. I know they would have the backing of the company to train beyond currency to competency.

I cannot imagine a scenario where crews were informed by MFO there would be no more training as the hours had run out.

Flounder (Just an unskilled, incompetent try hard staring through the misted perspex trying to do my best)

[Vie sans frontieres]

Standard decks, downwind decks, left to rights, right to lefts, trapped decks, RIBs, hi-lines, multi-seat dinghies, wets, ejectees, sits, IEC sits, drums, extended cable drums, AHT, navigation, GH, radar let downs, mountains

In fact it almost exactly reflects my own flying for the last 12 months

And in that 12 months, how many of the above training exercises were flown at night?

You could get away with 10hrs training per month if you also had comprehensive training in the simulator

What good is simulator training to the rearcrew who also need 20-25 hours per month?

[nowherespecial]

So then Sat,

In response:

How are you poorly manned?
Pages 48 and 49 of this discussion make reference to a manning problem that is developing.

I've read these pages and I still don't see. How on earth is that safe? manning is very frequently the last thing that comes together. BHL don;t need to have the crews now, they need them for contract start. Plus it is easy to argue the mil was undermanned, the UK Mil SAR used to work 24 hour shifts for example. Doing away with that is (IMHO) a good thing. I personally feel that working a 24 hour shift, even when given a fluffy bed and pillow for down time was a bad idea.

Why is the 189 a poor ac?
As far as SAR goes, it isn't even an aircraft yet!

True but it does exist, it's payload etc are well known now as is the role equipment which is tried and tested on other ac. any reason or insight you have as to why you expect it not to work when DoT, BHL and AW think it will would be appreciated.

Name some of the luxury vs necessities you are losing out on in this transition?
You've missed the point - hugely.

No I haven't. Aircrew rations were a great example of a total luxury. Seeing as you cannot name a single one of them, I will say there are none or you are too embarrassed to confess what they are.


If you don't like capitalism, I'm sure UT Air are recruiting in Moscow.
I don't think they're communists anymore.

True, but they are closer perhaps to the utopian state controlled ideal than BHL.


Seriously clutching at straws to say a properly trained pilot can't maintain a hover by looking through a bit of plastic.
A pilot who is taking just a one eighth share of 50 training hours per month per unit will hardly be able to conduct sufficient quality continuation training to meet such challenges.

Also, I'm worried about the people who think that some of these techniques are not a combination of techniques: someone mentioned decks and downwind decks as separate skills, they are not. People are taught downwind work very early in flying. You are simply overlaying existing knowledge and techniques with others to produce an end result (downwind + decks). Is it easy - no. Does it require 25 hours per pilot per month - no. If it does, we need new pilots.

[Vie sans frontieres]

nowherespecial

someone mentioned decks and downwind decks as separate skills, they are not. People are taught downwind work very early in flying. You are simply overlaying existing knowledge and techniques with others to produce an end result (downwind + decks). Is it easy - no.

the UK Mil SAR used to work 24 hour shifts for example. Doing away with that is (IMHO) a good thing.

It's important when entering a discussion to have a clue what you're talking about. It adds so much to your credibility. Mil SAR still work 24 hour shifts, as will Bristow. On downwind decks it's not the aircraft that's downwind. :rolleyes:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I estimate based on 25 hours/month with taskings on top I would expect you must be flying about 450-500 hours a year? Is this correct?

10 hours/month is too simplistic a calculation not taking in to account leave, sim training and various other commitments that remove a crew member from his/her flying duties. The estimated work pattern for BHL crew is 7-8 shifts a month restricted by FTL and ultimately the WTD of 2000 hours. This equates to about 15 hours a month, with taskings on top you're looking at roughly 25 hours a month. If that's flown over an average of 7 shifts in the month you're in the air for over 3.5 hours per shift. That doesn't sound insignificant to me. In fact it almost exactly reflects my own flying for the last 12 months having taken my full compliment of leave and 2 sim trips.


Somewhat simplistic. On many occasions, the tasking will occur before the crew go training, meaning that there isn't time (or desire) to train after a job/jobs. On some days, no training gets done because the weather is terrible or the aircraft is limited on hours. Over a number of years, I always achieved between 300 and 400 hours a year, and I doubt I was the fleet leader in terms of hours flown.

The other point to bear in mind is that SAROps may go on for a number of hours, but time spent searching and/or in transit is rarely useful training, whereas on a training sortie one can concentrate on a variety of the key skills. A 90-120 minute training sortie will typically generate much more useful training for the crew than a 6-8 hour SAROp.


It's important when entering a discussion to have a clue what you're talking about. It adds so much to your credibility. Mil SAR still work 24 hour shifts, as will Bristow. On downwind decks it's not the aircraft that's downwind.


:D:D:D


Does it require 25 hours per pilot per month - no. If it does, we need new pilots.


Apart from the other problems with your argument, the benefit of planning to have 20-25 hours a month is that, when an individual or crew doesn't get the chance to train for a period (leave, sickness, busy run of SAROps, shortage of airframe hours or whatever) they will still have accrued sufficient training in the last 6-12 months that they are probably still proficient. If somebody is getting 10 hours a month routinely, and then has a training famine, this makes it more likely that their proficiency will drop to an unacceptable level.

[[email protected]]

No I haven't. Aircrew rations were a great example of a total luxury.Then I guess you haven't ever done a busy SAR shift when you are retasked from one job straight onto the next or just get a cup of tea down your neck and start the paperwork when the job phone rings again - that is where a drawer full of choccy and other goodies comes into it's own - not exactly a total luxury when the first job was before you had a chance to get breakfast and you are still going at 7 in the evening.

As Vie pointed out - it adds a lot to your credibility if you have a vague clue what you are talking about - now you can do a downwind deck downwind if you like but there is probably an easier option, it can depend on how fast the boat is moving;)

[nowherespecial]

So this is what it comes to - tea, coffee and chocolate.

Wow. I hope I never have to get any of you come and fish me out. Will ensure my life jacket has a choccy bar in it in case you get hungry on your way home.

Flying is not rocket science. We make it sound difficult to look cleverer than we are. Virtually everything pilots do is a combination of systems monitoring (particularly in the civilian world), using the technology, crew management, basic straight and level and hovering. Be as sarcastic as you like, SAR is a good job and it isn't easy but you're not supermen, saying you are is an insult to the rest of us.

Good luck in the brave new commercial world. Be prepared for one hell of a shock.

[[email protected]]

I say again - when you know what you are talking about, someone might listen to your opinions but you clearly don't have a clue.

Some of the rearcrew can be considered supermen (and women) but none of us SAR pilots has claimed anything of the sort.

[Mind your ears]

[QUOTE] Some of the rearcrew can be considered supermen (and women) but none of us SAR pilots has claimed anything of the sort.[QUOTE]

If some of the rear crew could be considered supermen, why would they only be paid in peanuts?
Good luck to those guys at the end of the wire getting paid less than half of those in the dry seats up front.

Does anyone have any news about the possible shortfall in recruiting of rear seat crew for the contract start date?

[[email protected]]

If some of the rear crew could be considered supermen, why would they only be paid in peanuts?
Good luck to those guys at the end of the wire getting paid less than half of those in the dry seats up front.That's a question you need to ask the contractors, the MCA and the CAA.

[satsuma]

If some of the rear crew could be considered supermen, why would they only be paid in peanuts?

I think we've covered that. Profit.

[jimf671]

That's a question you need to ask the contractors, the MCA and the CAA.

Good luck with that. :ugh:

Between the HHO responsibilities, hover controls and the risk levels for HEC, one might easily imagine that a responsible regulator would step in and make reasonable demands of rear crew and operators that would drive good systems of work and responsible management.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Standard decks, downwind decks, left to rights, right to lefts, trapped decks, RIBs, hi-lines, multi-seat dinghies, wets, ejectees, sits, IEC sits, drums, extended cable drums, AHT, navigation, GH, radar let downs, mountains.

These are the basics. If only a few of these are currently being practised at night by coastguard crews then they clearly need more than 50 hours per month if they're to take over successfully from the military. The 'Bristow have been doing this since 1971' argument holds no water if all of these basic training exercises haven't been being completed in daylight and after dark.

[HarryMonk]

I see a number of ex - HEMS and Helimed guys changing their profiles on other media to "trainee SAR Winchman" positions with BHL

It looks like BHL will follow Bond down the Paramedic to Winchman career path, good thinking?

With the impending Falkalnds contract in 2015, this could prove an ideal training platform for ab-initio rear crew and even pilots to get some sound training experience before being moved over to the UK SAR project.

[Older and Wiser]

Not with the limited training hours available in the FI.

But it could work the other way if BHL are paying so poorley the FI guys could work for the NHS on their time off!

[nowherespecial]

Crab:

You say no one is listening and yet I've got a bite from you each time. Believe it or not I'm not trying to be a WUM, I'm just amazed that people fight the system so much. Give up or join the system and change from within. The last people who influence the helicopter operators are the pilots. They are a tradable commodity, there's always more pilots. It's a business and people are desperate to get into it.

PS - I'm 99% sure I know who you are if you have been a crab@saavn in the last 15 years and I have nothing but the highest respect for your opinions, we just disagree on this topic.

[mmitch]

Still training.
Exercise Joint Endeavour (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/exercise-joint-endeavour-22092014)
mmitch.

[[email protected]]

You say no one is listening and yet I've got a bite from you each time no, you have got a reply each time. I have argued the issues that concern me about privatisation until I am blue in the face - that cost me the opportunity to work from within as dissent is clearly not fashionable.

I have moved on and the new SAR service will be what it will be - some good bits and some not so good bits I suspect - I do at least have faith that a lot of good quality operators are moving across, although they will just have to do as they are told in the brave new world.

The challenges facing the new service are far greater and more complex than what was required on the S61 contracts with no NVD capability and a limited overland night capability as a result. Can they meet the challenges? Yes but not by limiting the training hours and paying the rearcrew peanuts.

I suspect I am who you think I am.:ok:

[[email protected]]

mmitch - the RAF SAR Force has taken part in a lot of multi-agency exercises like that (I have done 3 or 4 myself) any idea how many the MCA crews have done????? Or how many hours will be allocated in the future to such exercises???Or who will be acting as a SARLO at any major overland disaster????

[mmitch]

The thought had occurred to me too.
mmitch.

[jeepys]

Crab,
what did you do in these exercises, land, pick up casualties and take them to HLS or were there far more technical parts to it?

[[email protected]]

Yes, yes and yes.

If all you want is to wait for tasking and then wonder why you don't get used more, then don't go to these exercises.

If you want to understand how the Gold and Silver system works and want them to understand SAR capabilities and limitations, ensure that your representative in the Silver/Gold setup has decent comms and can liaise properly with the other emergency services and realise what other capabilities exist among them then perhaps it might not be a bad idea to engage and attend.

At least 80% of UKSAR is overland where the MCA don't have primacy so perhaps that is where more effort needs to be expended by a new and professional SAR service - just putting a coastie with a radio near the Gold/Silver control probably won't be as effective:ok:

We have worked with Urban Sar teams, swift water rescue teams, wind farms and the more people who understand what a SAR helo can do the better when the chips are down and there is a major emergency to deal with.

[jimf671]

Yes, yes and yes.

If all you want is to wait for tasking and then wonder why you don't get used more, then don't go to these exercises.

If you want to understand how the Gold and Silver system works and want them to understand SAR capabilities and limitations, ensure that your representative in the Silver/Gold setup has decent comms and can liaise properly with the other emergency services and realise what other capabilities exist among them then perhaps it might not be a bad idea to engage and attend.

At least 80% of UKSAR is overland ... .... ...

Strongly agreed. SAR is a team game.


... overland where the MCA don't have primacy ...

So where do they have primacy backed up by statutory provision? Smoke and mirrors may not be enough for the 21st century.

[Spanish Waltzer]

I see Cobham (ex FBH) are recruiting for military experienced SAR instructors for their SAR school at RAF Valley. Are UK military folk still being trained in SAR despite no longer being involved in mainstream UK SAR or is this for other work? Guess it could be a good opportunity for those that didn't make the Bristow cut

[Adam Nams]

Just seen this job (http://www.aviationjobsearch.com/job/helicopter-support-technical-crewman/2881739?s=normal)as well in Newquay:

The role is subject to a security clearance process and a
military wincing background is essential.

Ive done plenty of that, usually when doing night decks with Crab :)

[snaggletooth]

Don't fancy that salary very much :rolleyes:

[Older and Wiser]

Air Steward (Trolley Dolly) starting rate.

The role is subject to a security clearance process and a
military wincing background is essential.


In what way is 'wincing' miss spelt?

[[email protected]]

It should be 'mincing' ;) It is trolley-dolly wages after all! What on earth do they expect to get for £20K????

[Adam Nams]

I guess that it could be tied in with this:


As365N2 Line Pilot

Role for a Captain on a single pilot, multi crew day/night VFR/IFR operation based at Newquay supporting our military client with a MRCO As365 fleet .

The role involves passenger transfers to naval ships as well as specific roles to support our client’s activities.

Applicants must have an ex military flying background and display a high professional standard.



It should be 'mincing'

I've done plenty of that as well. Usually after doing night decks with Crab :)

[jimf671]

Here is a report of some 'posh hovering' a few weeks ago that may serve to demonstrate aspects of crew roles and the purpose of the SAR helicopter as principally an access tool.

Royal Navy helicopter lifts ill man from cruise vessel (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2014/may/12/140512-sar-ship-airlift)

[ShyTorque]

In what way is 'wincing' miss spelt?

Should have read "whingeing" :p

[Flounder]

Here is a report of some 'posh hovering' a few weeks ago that may serve to demonstrate aspects of crew roles and the purpose of the SAR helicopter as principally an access tool.


I'm more impressed by the PR machine that sent this out. Shame it was only a technician and not a paramedic attending though. ;)

[Vie sans frontieres]

Although paramedic skills are often used, it's relatively rare for them to actually make a significant difference towards the casualty's welfare or recovery. You're better off having someone who is a competent and capable helicopter crewman on the wire rather than purely a paramedic. That way sound airmanship decisions will be made by the winchman during the rescue, much to the relief of the remainder of the crew who are reliant upon him coming up with the goods.

[[email protected]]

You can't go around saying things like that Vie - how will the brave new SAR world reconcile the cheaply available paramedic with a few helicopter hours vs a competent helicopter crewmember who can make sensible medical decisions?

I though that the cheap paramedic route had been proven not to work since so many hours were required to make them competent to deliver their skills on mountainsides, heaving decks, in the water etc etc etc - or is it all about ticking DfT boxes for services rendered?

[jimf671]

Do you think maybe 'military wincing' is something that happens every time Crab posts? :E

[Flounder]

it's relatively rare for them to actually make a significant difference

Bit like jobs requiring a 360 radar.

[Vie sans frontieres]

If reduced spatial awareness when IMC at 200' over the sea in a busy shipping lane is your thing, then a radar that only covers one third of the circle is ideal.

[[email protected]]

You're still not 'on-message' Vie - new and shiny helicopters are the answer to everything, just because they are new, shiny and fast - whether they actually bring any better capability than (or even as good as) those they replace or not;)

Try not to mention 360 radar, downwash or poor rearcrew pay again:ok:

[jimf671]

... ... Try not to mention 360 radar, downwash or poor rearcrew pay again:ok:

Or aircraft the size of a bus, or captain's hearing, or run dry, or the customer's skill set?


I really need to get into this. Next week I am supposed to stay on-message for a whole four days. :rolleyes: Life is tough.

[Older and Wiser]

Are Dev A recruiting for BHL
Looking for male or female applicants with a strong civilian Paramedic background for future global SAR contracts. Would you like to transfer your medical skills and pair them with excellent training to become a qualified Search and Rescue Winchman? Please send your cv to: [email protected]

[jimf671]

Somethings going on. The job ads on the Bristow site are extended for another month.

[Older and Wiser]

I can see the scenario -

For a finders Fee Dev A recruit Paramedics and give them a very basic Rescue Swimmer Course to use them on global contracts until they have the DfT/UKSAR 50hrs minimum at which time they are passed over to Bristow to fill Winchman Slots. Lets face it top end Paramedic Pay in the NHS is C£27k (outside London) so the chance of flying for a little bit more money and still being able to work Bank rates for the NHS on days off is attractive.

[Vie sans frontieres]

I said this on another thread but it's worth repeating.


The winchmen training to be paramedics or paramedics training to be winchmen question is an old chestnut that is visited time and again on PPRuNe. If they are considering the latter, the simple question that Bristow need to ask themselves is are they prepared to conduct SAR operations with one member of the crew who has not been selected primarily for his aircrew qualities and secondarily for his ability to perform as SAR rearcrew?


What qualities are we talking about? His speed of thought, his ability to see the big picture, his understanding of the aircraft's safety parameters, his reaction time, his awareness of what the rest of the crew require of him, his vigilance, his athleticism, his resilience, his determination, his ability to think on his feet, his coordination, his ability to prioritise, his adaptability, his ability to offload the pilots and fulfil duties on their behalf (eg navigation), the speed of his comprehension, his performance under pressure, his ability to assimilate multiple inputs without reaching saturation point. The list is long and I've only just touched upon it.


Bristow may well have method of selecting ambulance paramedics who have those qualities and good luck to them if they do. However, these individuals are unlikely to have any/much flying time behind them. That will lead to a lengthy and frustrating training process if Bristow are to ensure that there is no reduction in the quality of SAR service provided in the UK when they take over. As I recall, the 'no reduction in quality' principle is fundamental to the civilianisation of UK Search and Rescue.

[Sevarg]

O and W
I would think that £42K is a lot more than £27K (Crabs figures)

[leopold bloom]

What qualities are we talking about? His speed of thought, his ability to see the big picture, his understanding of the aircraft's safety parameters, his reaction time, his awareness of what the rest of the crew require of him, his vigilance, his athleticism, his resilience, his determination, his ability to think on his feet, his coordination, his ability to prioritise, his adaptability, his ability to offload the pilots and fulfil duties on their behalf (eg navigation), the speed of his comprehension, his performance under pressure, his ability to assimilate multiple inputs without reaching saturation point. The list is long and I've only just touched upon it.
Don't forget facing forward and giving clear hand signals. ;)

[Moose Loadie]

DevA is primarily a pilot oriented organization. The crewman appear to be an afterthought and do not get the support or training needed to fulfill the role which they are expected to undertake. Written contracts are non existent and contractors who do not blindly fall in line with the demands of the company management are cast aside and no longer used. Should the contractor choose to separate from the company however, the contractor is expected to repay thousands of pounds for the training (training is not the correct term for what is actually provided) they have received.

I would advise anyone with an ounce of medical professionalism to seriously consider this before giving up a job with the hopes of obtaining a career in SAR. The thought of transferring from a road unit to a helicopter is an attractive proposition, but please do not think that DevA is a pathway into UKSAR provided by Bristow.

[shetlander]

I spy with my little eye...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10628019_10152692599326023_5826441432545214290_n.jpg?oh=209e e16b5411ef0ba9b7355ad5889943&oe=548351E9&__gda__=1420873612_26e65e7805a5cabd14b9c81f6b28c630&dl=1

[NavyTorque]

DevA have support ed the passage of Winchoperators to Bristows for UK ands Global SAR…… everyone of them has been a previous UK Aircrewman involved in SAR.

Historically Bristow have recruited very competent an capable Paramedics to be Winchoperators - in fact one their senior team in UK SAR used this route very successfully.

There is currently a requirement for Paramedics to join an audited LimSAR training programme similar to that used by Bristows for many years……

[NavyTorque]

You must be the crewman whose services were "No Longer Required"……. by DevA……

[Moose Loadie]

NavyTorque,

Absolutely, not trying to hide. There are always two sides to an argument and I’m sure, judging by your comment, you have heard from the other side of this one.

As for "an audited LimSAR training program", having been there for two audits, I know exactly how they get through one.

I stand by my assessment and feel foolish for ignoring the multiple warnings given before I made the decision to "contract" with DevA/Heli operations. Luckily for me, they made a great decision to no longer use my services.

[NavyTorque]

And thats the crux Moose isn't it - they no longer required your services….. you didn't leave.

DevA provide very competent experienced Crewmen Trainers (Glenn Holmes) to various locations globally…… Glenn has recently returned from Romania to deliver Crewman Training as the named AOC Trainer for SAR Operations for a local company…… can't be that bad eh?

DevA have also delivered training contracts on behalf of Cobham…… although I expect you know more about that too?

We all wish you luck in your future employment and no doubt DevA will provide you an excellent reference should you choose to apply to Bristow or CHC...

[NavyTorque]

Moose - it appears to be everyones else's fault doesn't it….. Now it is not only DevA who don't know what they are doing, Bristows who seem to be taking poorly qualified crewmen but now the experienced AUDITORS aren't doing their job either??

……..As for "an audited LimSAR training program", having been there for two audits, I know exactly how they get through one……..

These guys are experienced, qualified and current auditors - many of whom have many years service in aviation…..

Are you really claiming that you attempted to "cover up" OR pull the wool over their eyes…..

No wonder your services were No Longer Required or should we say PNG?

[Fareastdriver]

No bricks allowed in handbags.

[Moose Loadie]

NT,

Glenn Holmes is a top bloke and I wish I had been given the opportunity to learn something from him. It's a shame I didn't get the chance.

Please do not attempt to push my comments toward Bristow. I have no experience in how Bristow recruit, operate or run their audits. Knowing some of the guys over there, they appear happy and get the training and support they need. The audits I was involved in were for DevA and in no way did I attempt to cover up anything, which I know was not well received by some.

Since you appear to want to repeat it again. You are correct; my services were "no longer required". But hey, that’s the life of a contractor!

I'm sure you will want the final word so please go ahead. I have put my warning out there and that's all I can do.

[shetlander]

AW189 SAR training begins.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10440661_10154662341320224_7708965945976872064_n.jpg?oh=d754 62752b297012ea6004b645b325c7&oe=54AEFEE6&__gda__=1421461427_efcffd0e2c33ae9f5f8e85ecfdbe9cdd&dl=1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzFm6LKIQAEyifG.jpg

[NavyTorque]

Yep Moose because you make comments out of context….

Bristow's currently employ 5 crewmen in UK SAR who had NO Military SAR Background….. All of these guys are extremely competent crewmen introduced to SAR through DevA LimSAR Global operations. They also employ a number of other non-military SAR Crewmen.

The LimSAR roles for which DevA is looking for Paramedics is in Eastern Europe where they currently use non-paramedic non aircrew (of any experience) down on the wire ……. DevA have introduced structured training of the locals rather than just attaching them to the wire as has been the case for many years…. DevA have offered the first batch of trainees to be English speaking paramedics….. this overcomes the issue of language and introduces an important skill set to the Sar helicopter….. medical qualification.

LimSAR (Unfortunate use of the name) is used more and more by oil companies to provide a "Duty of Care" to crew change helicopter operations - in fact look up the excellent article recentlypublished in RotorHub that outlines the role and the very limited challenge presented to crews in the event of emergencies on LimSAR operations ie if there is poor weather / rough seas - the crew change helicopter isn't flying…….hence no need for SAR!

DevA provides aircrew whose experience is matched to the role required and in addition to 4000 man shifts covered in UK SAR over the past 8 years DevA successfully provided 100% manning (3000 man shifts) to the recent CHC SAR Ireland Transition and currently provides nearly 50% of the aircrew manning to CHC SAR UK (Portland and Lee) and contract S92 SAR Commanders in Ireland.

I am sorry but you have criticised Bristows, you are wrong to do that because they have very successfully taken non-aircrew for direct entry into SAR Crewmen - and pilots for that matter……. you have NO firsthand knowledge of Bristow SAR - I do - you have no commercial flying experience except that opportunity given to you by DevA……. and you were given direction by Glenn Holmes as the DevA company trainer and internal auditor - now we can air his findings on here as well if you wish…..

I don't have to have the last word….. except I cannot accept incorrect or misleading comments just to "Have a Go"

You know who I am and I know who you are so PM me if you have any issues concerning DevA operations or any areas that you feel that they can improve on then contact them…..or PM me?

Regards

[minigundiplomat]

Are we finished?

As the lady is in danger of protesting too much, can we get back to the thread?

[Vie sans frontieres]

The starting gun appears to have been fired on the race to the bottom. :sad:

[[email protected]]

Yes, and I'm sure Glenn loves having his name bandied around here.

[minigundiplomat]

Probably as much as CHC & Bristows want their names dragged into this unedifying spectacle.

[TTFD]

Shetlander

Incorrect. This is an AgustaWestland protoype aircraft that was in Aberdeen to be displayed at the P&J Energy Ball at the Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre on 4 October. It has now left Aberdeen on return to Italy.

This aircraft is not one of the new machines for Bristow and it was in Aberdeen last year painted in the usual Bristow colours for the same event!

Suggest you get your facts right before posting.

[jimf671]

My understanding is that, as TTFD stated, this is the AW prototype. This is the one that is being used as the partial SAR prototype before Bristow's first SAR aircraft is built at Milan.

Perhaps someone with UK SAR mountain flying experience would like to comment on the ground clearance.

[nelbhoy]

Anybody know why Bristow have suddenly stopped engineer recruitment in the UK?

[[email protected]]

ISTR that one of the sweeteners of the new SAR contract was that the 189 would be built at Yeovil - did they actually mean that some non-SAR 189s might be built there or that all 189s would be built in Italy and perhaps just kitted out in the SAR role in UK?

[collectivethrust]

The first one was built in Italy, as required by the Authorities The remaining ones are being built at Yeovil. Just as contracted.

Should see them soon.

[switch_on_lofty]

Red and White new-looking CG SAR helicopter seen flying in and around Yeovil this weekend. Unusual, never seen a CG SAR cab here before.
I'll be honest I can't tell any AW products apart unless they were designed over 40 years ago. Could have been a 189.

[Vie sans frontieres]

If ambulance paramedics are to be converted into winchmen the training they receive has to be of the highest order - lengthy and thorough - and we're talking the best part of a year. Any less just won't do.


Section 4.7 of CAP 999 gives a detailed list of ground and flying training requirements which although not exhaustive, would at least give someone without any SAR experience a fighting chance of doing a decent job. So here the CAA have laid down the bare minimum they expect to be covered, in quite a lot of detail, but then they get all vague. They say that the training and checking of what they are calling 'Technical Crew' has to be carried out by someone who is 'suitably qualified'.


What qualification are they talking about for rearcrew in the civil world? How will the CAA ensure that the 'technical crew' trainers themselves are capable of providing this training that will be absolutely critical to the safe outcome of operations?


http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP999_UK_helicoper_SAR.pdf

[Older and Wiser]

I dont know? a lot of the CAP999 requirements are covered on the in house Air Ambulance Courses, same with Police Observers. Recruit Air ambulance guys who want something a bit different and more pay and they always have something to fall back on.

(Very much tongue in cheek)

[jimf671]

... How will the CAA ensure that the 'technical crew' trainers themselves are capable of providing this training that will be absolutely critical to the safe outcome of operations? ...


Didn't winchop cover this already?

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/511282-uk-sar-2013-privatisation-new-thread-24.html#post7791363

[Older and Wiser]

Given the many comments about (poor) pay levels, lack of training etc etc for rearcrew what is rely happening on the ground are military rearcrew:

a) joining BHL in their droves
b) holding out for better pay offers from BHL
c) looking for other SAR aviation roles
d) staying in the military

[Jerry Can]

Some of us are going to Bristow. Some are staying in. Some have gone or are going elsewhere to do SAR. There's a fairly even spread of the first two and a handful of the third. As for holding out for better pay, that maybe some peoples plan but not that I'm openly aware of.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Didn't winchop cover this already?

Sort of. This is what he said.

The good news is that the CAA have indeed allocated an individual to oversee Rear Crew standards.
The bad news is he is also the CAA Chief Cabin Crew Safety Inspector. His background is as a flight attendant with no Rear Crew helicopter experience.
When I quizzed him on this, he indicated that the CAA do not deem Rear Crew Standardisation and oversight important enough to warrant it being a fulltime position allocated to an individual experienced in the role.

The kindest thing that can be said about what is reported above is that the CAA's understanding of what is required of SAR rearcrew is totally inadequate. Those updated training requirements shown in the revised CAP 999 may have changed, but I don't know if the Chief Cabin Crew Safety Inspector is still their top man to oversee SAR.

My question though was regarding the qualification of trainers on SAR flights. If pilots have to prove their ability to train and check others to the CAA, why not rearcrew? It makes no sense when rearcrew are so deeply involved in the safety and success of an operation. And if Bristow are, as appears to be the case, converting ambulance paramedics with minimal flying time into front line winchmen, then it is absofunkinglutely essential that the people that are responsible for training them have been recognised by some sort of authority as sufficiently capable instructors with a broad enough range of SAR experience to be both credible and authoritative. That's what is expected of pilot instructors. Why not rearcrew? This is serious stuff.

[[email protected]]

Said trolley-dolly inspector did actually visit a SAR flight to see what it was all about and was taken on a training sortie - if after that he still doesn't think the specialisation warrants full-time oversight from an experienced professional then that absolutely sums up how poorly thought out the governance of UK SAR is going to be.

[Helimed24]

Whether Navy, RAF SAR crews or indeed HEMS remember you all had to start at some point. UK SAR will work because SAR crews are passionate and dedicated to make it work!

[Vie sans frontieres]

Everyone had to start somewhereCorrect. Somewhere like an aircrew selection centre where only a small percentage make it through followed by months of leadership and ground-based professional training designed to reveal unwelcome character flaws and suitability for flying training. Then a year or two of basic flying training, operational conversion on one type or another, squadron-based operational flying, SAR pre-selection, then a lengthy, exacting SAR course with a high chop rate followed by SAR operational conversion and squadron acceptance.

Or you could bypass all that flying selection, training and experience and just get lucky when some gaps need plugging.


UK SAR will work because SAR crews are passionate and dedicated to make it work!I think it will take a little more than dizzy optimism and blind faith.

[[email protected]]

And it is supposed to hit the ground running to replace the military service with no loss of capability - there is no start-up honeymoon period which is why the mil won't stand down their flights until the new ones have been proven to operate to standard.

[Spanish Waltzer]

which is why the mil won't stand down their flights until the new ones have been proven to operate to standard.

Is that officlal MOD or crab@ policy? Has anyone told the guys trying to keep the Sea Kings alive....

...and if true who is going to determine they are operating to 'standard'? That trolley dolly inspector you have disparaged or maybe the author of 999 (who now works for Bristow!) or perhaps the MCA who reportedly are out of their depth to deal with inland SAR.....maybe DevA could be contracted to send in Glenn to save us all:ok:

[Vie sans frontieres]

and if true who is going to determine they are operating to 'standard'?

Now there's a question! I wonder if they'll pass. :hmm:

[[email protected]]

Spanish - there is a 3 month overlap to ensure that each new SAR flt is up and running before its military counterpart stands down - this was part of the Dft plan to minimise disruptions to the SAR service - so, not crab@ policy at all:ok:

As for the new flights being up to standard - they will meet their own internal standards, perhaps with a bit of fudging as it isn't clear whether the many people offered jobs in the 'transition teams' meet the full contract specifications. The 'steady-state' of some of those flights probably won't be achieved for a good while after they are officially stood-up as some of the mil guys won't get released early enough for their 250-hours glass-cockpit training (or will that just get ignored).

I am sure the author of CAP 999 will be a valuable addition to the party and ensure that the vague guidelines included in that document are strictly adhered to.;)

The trolley-dolly inspector might be a fine individual but wtf does he know about SAR rearcrew and their operating standards????

[Spanish Waltzer]

Crab - I think you & I both know that a planned 3 month 'overlap' of the service is not the same as the mil not standing down until the new has been proved to operate to standard

Out of interest how is the military keeping trained and proficient crews at bases til the bitter end? I thought that was the point of a managed transition but if each base is hanging on to its military crews for 3 months once the civilian service is up and running then the numbers dont add up! I appreciate it is being phased in but you cant step out of a sea king straight into a S92/189/139:mad:

[[email protected]]

That is a surprisingly easy question to answer - not all the mil crews are part of the managed transition so they will fly the old girl until the bitter end while those who are being taken on will leave early to convert to type - that is the theory anyway;) As each flight shuts it will also free up crews to do shifts at the remaining bases.

Why is there a 3-month overlap if not to ensure the new service is up to speed before removing the old one???

[jimf671]

139 is being phased out as well.

[seniortrooper]

There may have been a 3 month overlap but Bristow is currently advertising it is ahead of the game by almost 3 months. I think you'll find there is no "monitoring" of 'civvy SAR flights to ensure all is well! The transition will be managed but you won't be able to get a fag packet between the stop and start times. :( RAFSAR will end earlier than you think - in the UK.

I still continue to be amazed at the mentality of military folk towards their civilian counterparts. Bristow won't even break sweat doing this for a living - credit where it's due please. They are a WORLD class operator, always have been.:rolleyes:

[jimf671]

Do work for Weber Shandwick?

[dingo9]

snrtrpr,
The views of some(2) regular contributors to this forum do not represent the views of 'military folk'. It's been said before, just throwing it out there as a reminder ;)

[[email protected]]

There may have been a 3 month overlap but Bristow is currently advertising it is ahead of the game by almost 3 months. so we will see the 189 flights operational on time then???? Why are intended 189 crews converting to the 92 then?
The 3-month overlap has always been part of the planning - if it doesn't get used then fine but it is there for contingency planning and we aren't there yet;)
Dingo - since I am 'military folk' clearly my views are representative of some;)

[P3 Bellows]

Crab,

As you seem to have now broken your self imposed vow of silence, are we to take it that you were not offered a job with Bristows?

[Norma Snockers]

I saw that Lossiemouth were involved in a Rig evacuation the other week, and that Sumburgh were also involved. From the report, the Sea King took off 34 people in 2 runs but the S92 could only take 18 in 2 runs (2 runs of 9), admittedly it was only a precautionary down manning (something to do with a vessel carrying radio active waste drifting towards the rig) but that doesn't quite seem like progress to me?

[jimf671]

And the fuel load remaining in each aircraft at time of offshore departure was .... ?

[[email protected]]

P3 - that's very old news but you are correct - apparently A2 SAR QHIs with 8000 + hours and 14 years of operating, instructing and examining in UK SAR are so abundant that my services were not required because I dare to have an opinion about what UKSAR should look like.

Someone clearly didn't understand the sentiment of 'keep your friends close but your enemies closer':ok:

I'm actually rather happy to get all my weekends back and not get dragged out of bed at 2 am for a pointless search.

[Norma Snockers]

And the fuel load remaining in each aircraft at time of offshore departure was .... ?

irrelevant when you consider the Sea King had planned to carry out the evacuation in 3 lifts, instead it took 4 lifts (2 from the Sea King and 2 from the S92) but would have taken 6 lifts if the S92 had done it on its own!

[dingo9]

Crab- your views are representative of 1, yours.

[[email protected]]

Hmm Dingo - and just how many RAF SAR crewrooms have you spent time in???

[cyclic]

and two runs in an EC225 with full fuel :D

8000 hours Crab, that in the Naafi queue?

[[email protected]]

You can seat 17 pax in a Mk3/3A.

Oh dear, cyclic - really???? And it's nearer 9000 but I have been flying for 32 years:ok:

[dingo9]

Only 2 tours worth to be honest before moving over to proper military flying, but the non deployable ranting A2's tune rarely changes. I was also an A2 BTW before moving onto the commercial sector and having my eyes opened for both better and worse.

[[email protected]]

Nice to see the chips on your shoulders so nicely balanced Dingo:ok: and you clearly don't qualify as 'military folk' any more;)

The clear answer to my question about how many RAF SAR crewrooms you had been in (in order to claim my views were not shared) is none then:ugh:

[dingo9]

That was 2 SAR tours, 3 SH and no chips, just left at my option. Now enjoying the other side of the fence.And to keep this on thread this ex-military folks opinion is that a new fresh SAR set up will be a great opportunity and will eventually develop into a world leading service. To the guys and girls who did get a job... Well done and good luck.

[Hot_LZ]

I Believe the reason that the CG S92 was only taking 9 per trip is that the situation was not classed as an 'emergency'. This means they are limited to seated pax and operate under CAT rules. In an emergency they have dispensation to take a lot more.

LZ

[jimf671]

Is there any indication of who defines whether it's an emergency?

Commander? ARCC? Requesting authority?

[Norma Snockers]

LZ, I did say it was a precautionary downgrade of the rig, but this begs the question how many other jobs that Military SAR currently do will be turned down because it's not quite an "emergency" and so CAA rules won't allow it? Like the increasing number of rig personnel that military SAR are being asked to transfer because the person can't get into an immersion suit for whatever reason. It seems this is acceptable for the Mil SAR crews to take on risk, but not for the civvies.
I have no doubt that the aircraft and crews are very capable, but will it truly offer the same service if it is hampered by CAA regulations for anything other than an "emergency" callout?

[Hot_LZ]

I'm not a SAR man myself but I do understand that the SAR assets, whether military or civilian are tasked by the same agency, the ARCC. Those in the game will be better placed to answer the question of who classes the task.

It is simply not true that CG aircraft do not retrieve injured offshore workers and military crews are. They both get their fair share and from what I have witnessed CG crews are tasked to jobs because their military counterparts are off state due to U/S aircraft and lack of crews.

I think it is fantastic what the military have done for SAR over countless years however the government have made the decision to privatise for a multitude of reasons. Instead of trying to shoot the fledgling service down why don't we get behind the new system and ensure it is a success!

LZ

[Norma Snockers]

P3, did I say the captains could decide what category a job was and turn it down? No, what I did say is that iif the job is NOT given an "emergency/life saving" tag by ARCC/CG then they ARE bound by CAA regs (as per the S92 only being able to take 9 pax at a time, cos the pax HAVE to have seats) I know that if it had been classed as an essential downgrade, they could have sat people on the floor, but it wasn't and so they were hampered by the rules. No wonder crab gets frustrated, people jump on him for having an opinion, but read there own take on it instead of reading what he actually says.
And LZ, Yes the CG do go and take people of the rigs, but if you speak to the crews at Boulmer and Lossiemouth, they can provide you with details of jobs that they have been asked to do because the civvies wouldn't (because the casualty, who is not life critically threatened can't get an immersion suit on and so they cannot fly them under CAA rules)
The CG will provide a very good service, but will they do EVERYTHING that is being done now, (I like to hope so, but only time will tell).

[Hot_LZ]

Yes the rules have changed for pax carriage on CAT flights. These cover no immersion suit/life jacket, escorted by minder etc. in these cases the crew change cannot take them but instead it falls on the SAR crews.

As far as I'm aware there is no rule that hinders the CG from collecting these cases and returning them to land. But I stand to be corrected by those who know better.

lZ

[Norma Snockers]

LZ, maybe it was just the crew change, in which case I apologise :) but they are obviously still hampered by some of these regs, hence only carrying 9 pax on the precautionary down grade

[jimf671]

I am fairly clear about HM Gov being determined that an equivalent service will be provided. :ok:

We do not yet know what a service under the MAIN contract for the UK SAR Helicopter Service and CAP 999 v2 will be like in practice and we will not know until next April. :hmm: Detailed technical requirements are greater in that contract than in any other contract awarded for this type of work in the UK. :ok:

It is not clear to me what effect that watershed will have on operations out of Sumburgh, Stornoway, Lee and Portland. These are still on the GAP contract until 2017. :suspect:

[[email protected]]

P3 - I want the new SAR service to be a success for many reasons, not least because it is what the British public deserves and I have a lot of good mates who will be operating in it.

However, rather than believing every bit of spin, PR and glossy sales-brochures, I prefer to remain cynical in the hope I will be proved wrong and that some of the shady practices that were the reality of commercial SAR many years ago are consigned to history.

Don't forget how the 139 was introduced to SAR service with trumpet fanfares by the MCA whilst the reality was that it had next to no night overwater capability because the lighting was poor and the SAR modes of the AFCS hadn't been certified.

I hope the decision not to employ me wasn't just pettiness or spite - that would not be the hallmark of a professional organisation and would rather confirm some of my worries about how things might be run in the future.

If the ethos is that you should keep quiet when you know things aren't right - how does that set the stage for honest and open reporting and any form of credible Safety Management System?

The question is - how long will it take the new SAR service to get to its steady state with mature SOPs and all the right people in the right place? On the roadshows the senior people were talking about 5 years so what will it be like on day 1 when it is supposed to be at least equivalent to that which it replaces?

It was always going to be a big challenge and, as I said before, I hope it works but I'm not going to stop taking the reality pills just because other people have vested interests.

[SeaKingDriver]

but they are obviously still hampered by some of these regs, hence only carrying 9 pax on the precautionary down grade

I like to get the job done as much as the next person, and have never considered myself a jobsworth - but you could argue that the rules as they apply to a precautionary situation are there for a reason!

[[email protected]]

Wrong, wrong and wrong P3 - 'people like me' are quite capable of wanting something to be a success because it is the best thing for those involved and those that the Service will rescue.

'People like me' are not convinced that a for profit organisation is the best way to provide UK SAR but 'people like me' are quite happy to be proved wrong.

If the new SAR service isn't as good as advertised then I (and people like me) won't be high-fiving or celebrating - I know I would just be disappointed.

Most of what I have 'spouted' on here over the years has been factually correct and I have acknowledged when I have made a mistake - just because some parties didn't like what I had to say, doesn't make me wrong.

[jimf671]

From Bristow AW189 thread but more appropriately placed here.

Care to expand further? Re. Attitude of the MCA.


The clue is in the name really: MARITIME and COASTguard. The current four bases were established on the basis of the maritime need, only one does mountain work and it's far enough from Hampshire that they can imagine it's not happening, taking on a service with 70+% Land SAR jobs without any thought of needing a Land SAR skill set, failure to report publicly details of helicopter SAR work (as concluded in reports of 2001 and 2006), only in 2010 did the flights truly become part of the UK SAR fleet and come under ARCC control, they behave toward SAR partners as though the MCA was part of MI6, the secrecy is forced upon their contractors in spite of the contractors entering the contract process with the belief that SAR is a team game, centralisation is an ongoing feature of MCA planning, MCA media and communications people can't even acknowledge things that are in plain site in public areas. (Abridged version.)

Don't take my word for it. Check out the "officialCoastguard" line. Watch the video "Why we are here" and then tell me that this is an organisation ready to take the central role in the provision of SAR aeronautical support across the UK SRR where 70+% are Land jobs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7fITlBz7g0
https://twitter.com/MCA_media/status/512921828759994368
http://www.bristowsar.com/



Great work lads but your customer is a pain.

[[email protected]]

And that centralisation relies very heavily on IT and comms working seamlessly - we know neither of those ever goes wrong, goes wrong, goes wrong......:ugh:

To be fair, a certain amount of what the MCA deals with is already outside their remit ie above the high tide line overland which is technically police primacy and no-one seems to worry about that.

[jimf671]

... ...
To be fair, a certain amount of what the MCA deals with is already outside their remit ie above the high tide line overland which is technically police primacy and no-one seems to worry about that.


CAN OF WORMS WARNING!

The high water mark has long been offered as a marker between SAR jurisdictions. However, I and others have searched for a statutory provision supporting this idea but have found none. Another result of those searches is a failure to find any statutory authority for the Coastguard.

Although the police in Scotland acquire authority directly through the provisions of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012, the Coastguard acquires authority only secondhand through the authority conferred on a Secretary of State by statutes or conventions.

A significant worry for some SAR partners during the contract process for the new UK SAR Helicopter Service has been the police taking their eye off the ball. In England, NPAS, the threat of mergers, payments from Murdoch and framing cabinet ministers has distracted them from minor issues like public safety. In Scotland, the long-term navel-gazing of the police unification process has taken the same toll.

[TwoStep]

This was put out by HM Coastguard today:

Nothing new, although the date in the first line looks suspicious, more than one year after the Sea King has gone.

By summer of 2017 there will be 10 coastguard helicopter bases around the UK.

All of these bases will be operated by Bristow Helicopters Ltd on behalf of Her Majesty’s Coastguard at:

Central southern England
Northern England
Northern Scotland
North Wales
Shetland Isles
South east England
Southern Scotland
South Wales
South west England
Western Isles

Bristow Helicopters Ltd already provides helicopters and crew to our two bases in Shetland and the Western Isles. Over the coming months, seven more coastguard helicopter bases will open and our current base at Lee on Solent will move over to the Bristow contract. As the new bases open, the military helicopters which currently carry out civilian search and rescue will finish their civilian obligations.


The new crews will be highly experienced, many will be existing crew who are currently working in search and rescue either for the military or coastguard.
The helicopters will provide search and rescue many miles out to sea and all the way around the 10,500 miles of UK coast. Our coastguard helicopters will also operate extensively inland.

[jimf671]

... the date in the first line looks suspicious, more than one year after the Sea King has gone. ... ... ...


No worries.

2017 is when the GAP contract bases change over to the MAIN contract.

This is how it is supposed to work.

01 April 2015 - Lossiemouth to Inverness (RAF to Bristow), Lot 2, 2 x AW189. Training Base: 1 x Aw189.
01 April 2015 - Leconfield to Humberside (RAF to Bristow), Lot 1, 2 x S-92.

01 July 2015 - Valley to Caernarfon (RAF to Bristow), Lot 1, 2 x S-92.
01 July 2015 - Wattisham to Manston (RAF to Bristow), Lot 2, 2 x AW189.

01 Oct 2015 - Chivenor to St Athan (RAF to Bristow), Lot 2, 2 x AW189.
01 Oct 2015 - Boulmer (RAF) discontinued.

01 Jan 2016 - Prestwick (RN to Bristow), Lot 2, 2 x AW189.
01 Jan 2016 - Culdrose to Newquay (RN to Bristow), Lot 1, 2 x S-92.

01 April 2017 - Sumburgh (Bristow: GAP to MAIN), Lot 1, 2 x S-92.
01 April 2017 - Lee-on-Solent (CHC GAP to Bristow), Lot 2, 2 x AW189.

01 July 2017 - Stornoway (Bristow: GAP to MAIN), Lot 1, 2 x S-92. Training base: 1 x S-92.
01 July 2017 - Portland (CHC GAP) discontinued.

[[email protected]]

So they have 5 months to get the first 189 flt up and running and there are no crew trained on it yet!!!!!!!

Let's see when Lossie actually closes.

[leopold bloom]

[email protected] So they have 5 months to get the first 189 flt up and running and there are no crew trained on it yet!!!!!!!

Let's see when Lossie actually closes.

A bit of "Posh hovering" and a First Aid kit for the cabin attendant can't take more than a trip or two surely?:ugh:

[Hompy]

Are you sure about the lack of crew? Or is it a case of making the rabbit look all the more impressive when it comes out the hat?

[sonas]

Jim your posts are driving wedges between the new service and the majority of MRTs. Me thinks you think your an absolute authority on ALL matters re land sar.
Out of curiosity, how long you been MRT?

New playing field, new ball and whilst I'm not saying the previous ball game was rubbish and far from it, I am saying it's here and no amount of blah blah blah about Sea Kings is going to change it. I remember the exact same fears when the Sea king came in to replace the Wessex.
You appear to be very disrespectful of Helo crews in your area? Have you pi**ed some one off and they no longer play ball with you?
To be honest in my opinion your swimming against the tide!
How's that for a nautical theme!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

So they have 5 months to get the first 189 flt up and running and there are no crew trained on it yet!!!!!!!

Even if it's fact that there are no crew trained on it (is this true or just The Gospel According To St Crab?), it won't take 5 months to train experienced people on the 189, especially if they already have 139 experience. By way of comparison, how long does it take SARTU to convert Sea King folks onto the Griffin ready for 84 Sqn? No more than a month?

Let's see when Lossie actually closes.

I suspect Lossie will close at the planned time, irrespective of exactly what capability/proficiency the Inverness 189 has achieved. As long as there is a shiny new helicopter and crew on show at the Bristow base, the neighbouring mil SAR flt will close without delay - possibly even earlier than expected.

[jimf671]

sonas, are you sure?

Here is an example of a typical MRT full of experienced people talking about the change in aeronautical support.
Privatising search-and-rescue service and closing bases 'will cost lives' | Politics | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/31/privatising-search-rescue-helicopters-risk-lives#start-of-comments)

Here is an example of another MRT full of experienced people wanting a helicopter based in a location with very poor aeronautical conditions and no existing aeronautical infrastructure.
Fresh plea for rescue chopper | Lochaber News | News (http://www.lochaber-news.co.uk/News/Fresh-plea-for-rescue-chopper-13072012.htm)

Here is the Scottish Government sounding off about the change.
SNP condemn search-and-rescue helicopter changes - The Scotsman (http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/snp-condemn-search-and-rescue-helicopter-changes-1-2857718)


In contrast, here is a BBC article based on a press release from me.
BBC News - Kintail MRT seeks early training with new air rescue crews (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-18057754)

Here is the address of the emagazine page of the Scottish Mountain Rescue website
http://www.mountainrescuescotland.org/online-casbag/
where you will find articles written by me about the new service appearing at p6 of Edn 28, p16 of Edn 31 and p21 of Edn 34.


Explain to us how "This has the makings of a world-class service" is driving a wedge?

Explain to us how "this is the first entirely planned aeronautical search and rescue service for the UK" is negative or disrespectful.

What probably sums up the whole thing is the photo on page 7 of Edition 28 of Casbag showing a well know winchy hauling me into CG100 that is captioned "Your new best friend".

============

Crab, crews are half-expecting to be operating out of Inverness in S-92 at first. Some people even suspect that your pals will get the first AW189 at St Athan.

[mmitch]

There is no sign of the base at Manston yet. Because of the fight to reopen the airfield, any planning application is scrutinised. There are proposals for 4000 houses if the developers get their way...
mmitch.

[sonas]

Jim - YAWN. Time for bed:D

[snaggletooth]

Great and informative reply Jim. What is sonas's beef I wonder?:ugh:

[Ian Corrigible]

A reflection on the transfer of SAR duties from the services to industry, taken from today's Royal Aeronautical Society (http://www.raes.org.uk) 'commentary' email.

Three More Cheers for Royal Navy and Royal Air Force Search and Rescue

With less than one year to go now before the beginning of progressive change in how UK helicopter-based Search and Rescue (SARS) activities are undertaken, it is, I hope, right that we should stop a while and reflect on the absolutely brilliant and ongoing work still being performed by highly trained and dedicated armed forces personnel within the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force and by members of the civilian helicopter service who are under contract to the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA). First, though, a reminder of what will soon take over from military-operated Search and Rescue services.

Jointly managed by the MCA and the Ministry of Defence and with the Government having abandoned an earlier plan that had envisaged bringing rotary-based Search and Rescue into a single entity using both civilian and military aircrews, in 2011 the Coalition Government decided that future UK Search and Rescue activity would be based on a totally civilian-based and operated service. To that end, military-based Search and Rescue activity will be progressively drawn down through 2015 to 2017, during which time the current 40-plus strong fleet of Royal Navy and Royal Air Force Sea King Mk V helicopters would be stood down and retired. Completion of the Sea King withdrawal process is planned to be completed by March 2016.

With responsibility for the new Search and Rescue (SAR-H) facility passing from MCA and MoD responsibility to the Department for Transport, the newly privatised service is intended to be managed by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and run by Bristow Helicopters Ltd. Bristow will take over operation of the service from the military on a progressive basis starting in 2015 using a fleet of 22 new helicopters - 11 Sikorsky S-92s plus 11 AgustaWestland AW189s.

The value attached to the Bristow Search and Rescue contract was, I believe, put at around £1.6bn and the number of new jobs likely to be created was, I believe, put at 350. Balfour Beatty was appointed by Bristow Helicopters as its infrastructure partner responsible for delivery of infrastructure at nine sites, including seven new-build search and rescue helicopter bases at commercial airports in Inverness, Manston, Prestwick, Caernarfon, St Athan, Humberside and Newquay. Existing facilities at Stornoway were to be refurbished and Bristow will also make use of an existing MCA facility at Lee-on-Solent.

The current plan envisages that the new service should be fully operational across the whole country by summer 2017. Clearly, many existing and former highly-trained members of the current military-based Search and Rescue SARS service have already and will be employed by the new service operator but over time the new operator will need to train a new breed of search and rescue operatives who will not have had the benefit of military training and disciplines.

So much for the planned new operation, time now to reflect on a military-based Search and Rescue operation that is still very active. As in previous years, 2014 was to prove no exception in terms of the amount of work presented to Royal Navy and Royal Air Force search and rescue helicopter crews on a day by day basis. Operatives crewing Sea King helicopters are, of course, skilled individuals who well know the risks and dangers of the work that they do. These are highly trained military professionals for which there is nothing within the limits of the capability that they have that they would not be prepared to undertake. The list of missions undertaken by Royal Navy and Royal Air Force crews over the past 70 years of rotary-based action would need volumes if it were to be listed as opposed to a single book and it is also worth recording here that this is one aspect of overall UK defence in which the admiration that the crews and the helicopters receive from the public knows absolutely no bounds.

Together with members of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) who volunteer and who put their own lives at very considerable risk to help save the lives of others, members of Her Majesty’s Coastguard and the volunteer Mountain Rescue and Air Ambulance service we are indeed very fortunate to have such extraordinary teams of professionals working 24 hours each and every day of the year to help save lives. I would like to believe that the new privatised search and rescue operation will provide the same level of dedication and resolve that has been part of the enduring service provided by military-based search and rescue over very many years.

Watching footage of the Royal Navy Sea King Mk V hovering over the beach at Mawgan Porth in Cornwall during the recent surfing tragedy that cost three people their lives was, to me a timely reminder of the brilliant job that our rescue services perform. Bravery knows no bounds and to observe some of the previous mission footage and photographs and the risks that they endured in the attempt to save lives is quite amazing.

To the above list of those that provide an excellent service to the public should be added the Lifeguards who, through the main summer holiday months, ensure responsible use of our beaches so that they are safe for all to use and safely enjoy.

Having played a part in fighting the attempt to privatise UK Search and Rescue and accepting that there can now be no turning back the clock, I am left to hope that what is planned to replace military search and rescue will be every bit as good as what it will replace. I count myself very fortunate to have flown several times over the years with both 771 Naval Air Squadron Sea King Mk V search and rescue (SARF) helicopter teams from their base at RNAS Culdrose and also with members of Royal Air Force 202 Squadron SARF (D Flight) from their base at Lossiemouth on a similar Sea King Mk V. The teams that fly these venerable yet very well maintained helicopters are as remarkable as they are truly professional and the like of which I doubt we will see again.

For the record Royal Air Force Sea King Mk V helicopters of both 22 and 202 Squadron operate from six locations (22 Squadron from RMB Chivenor (A Flt), Wattisham Airfield (B Flt) and RAF Valley (C Flt) and 202 Squadron from RAF Boulmer (A Flt), RAF Lossiemouth (D Flt) and RAF Leconfield (E Flt). Sea King Mk V Search and Rescue operation by the Royal Navy is conducted from both RNAS Culdrose, Cornwall and from HMS Gannet at Prestwick in Scotland. For land-based rescues, such as the mountains of Scotland for instance, the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy can also call on the services of five Mountain Rescue Teams each of which are manned by core permanent staff supported by around 30 volunteers.

My intent today was not an attempt to analyse the proposed new search and rescue service that will begin operation next year against that of the current hugely successful Sea King-based operation. I may regret the change but I accept that it is about to happen and it will, just as the current military-based search and rescue arrangements have over many years, receive my full support and backing. In a world dominated by issues of affordability that is foremost to requirement, we may hope that the right decision has been made. We will have to wait and see and we must, of course, not only provide what assistance and support that we can we must also give the new service time to bed in.

I may also hope that many examples of the superb Sea King helicopter, and which members of the public are so attached, find themselves retired to museums where the public can repay the huge debt of gratitude that these very fine machines are justifiably owed. Three cheers then for Royal Navy and Royal Air Force Search and Rescue crews and for the venerable Sea King helicopters that they fly!

Howard Wheeldon FRAeS
I/C

[[email protected]]

Some lovely sentiment in there but SARS is a disease and the RAF fly Mk 3 and 3A Sea Kings:ok:

TOTD - any guess how long it takes to convert pilots onto type and then into SAR role on an S92? It's certainly not as short as a month for either element:ok:

[Vie sans frontieres]

Not to mention the time taken to convert to the great unmentionables - goggles.


You would think that training staff would need at least three months with the aircraft to work out SOPs before they start training the front line crews.


How is NVG training going on the GAP SAR contract anyway?


Latest News - bristowgroup.com (http://www.bristowgroup.com/bristow-news/latest-news/2013/bristows-new-aircraft-uk-gap-search-and-rescue-con/)


"Bristow invested in the latest night vision goggle technology in order to give the Gap SAR crews the very best equipment to be able to operate safely. Our new S-92 search and rescue aircraft are the first type in Europe to be certified for night vision goggle (NVG) technology."

With the long dark nights of winter coming they must be glad they've got their goggles. Or am I mistaken? Surely it's true if it appears on the website.

[jimf671]

Great and informative reply Jim. What is sonas's beef I wonder?:ugh:


For heaven's sake snaggle, don't mention beef (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/483178-whats-wrong-shetland-beef.html)in relation to Coastguard helicopters! :E

[jimf671]

Not to mention the time taken to convert to the great unmentionables - goggles.


You would think that training staff would need at least three months with the aircraft to work out SOPs before they start training the front line crews.


How is NVG training going on the GAP SAR contract anyway?


Latest News - bristowgroup.com (http://www.bristowgroup.com/bristow-news/latest-news/2013/bristows-new-aircraft-uk-gap-search-and-rescue-con/)


"Bristow invested in the latest night vision goggle technology in order to give the Gap SAR crews the very best equipment to be able to operate safely. Our new S-92 search and rescue aircraft are the first type in Europe to be certified for night vision goggle (NVG) technology."

With the long dark nights of winter coming they must be glad they've got their goggles. Or am I mistaken? Surely it's true if it appears on the website.


Ah, the great unmentionables! :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

At last, we're on the same page on something important Vie.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Someone will come along now and say that NVG was not a requirement of the GAP SAR contract - which is correct.


In which case, why brag about it and tell everyone that you're going the extra mile and converting to NVG early, over and above the contract specifications? If it was to ensure that operational crews were experienced in using NVG on type come April 1st then great, what a sensible idea. However, would someone would like to tell us how much NVG flying has been done on the GAP SAR contract so far? (I think we know the answer.)

[Sumpor Stylee]

NVG, who mentioned NVG!!!!

Training not planned to commence until January, crews only training while on duty, using an aircraft with no winch.

Try the cheapest not up to date NVG technology for that too.....:ugh:

What was that about cost saving??

And don't mention the beef, Navy Torque can't defend himself now he's been banned from the forum......

[jimf671]

NVG, who mentioned NVG...!!!!

Training not planned to commence until January, crews only training while on duty, using an aircraft with no winch........

Try the cheapest not up to date NVG technology for that too.....:ugh:

What was that about cost saving??


SS, I know you are only 3, but let's try to keep it real. The cheapest NVIS is £99 from Lidl. What Bristow are using is top-end ITAR-controlled commercially available at time of purchase. And SAR Force aircrew don't have the very latest Generation either.

====================

Vie, I think I know the answer too.

[[email protected]]

https://bristowgroup.taleo.net/careersection/2/jobdetail.ftl?job=49560
Seems they are looking for a SAR training manager - can't believe they haven't already got that filled - probably just advertising for the sake of legality.

Would be interesting to see the CV of the winning candidate;)

[Vie sans frontieres]

Training not planned to commence until January, crews only training while on duty, using an aircraft with no winch.

Is there not an NVG training course? At the promised training school? Or are they just going to give it a go and see what happens? If they go about it that way I shudder to think what's going to happen. NVG merits about a month of training for those that haven't used them before and certainly about a fortnight for those that have but not on type.

[Sumpor Stylee]

Since you know so much Jim then tell us what NVG setup is being used as you clearly are at the hub of Bristow's operation....?

The statement published "latest" technology so the query stands.

[212man]

Seems they are looking for a SAR training manager - can't believe they haven't already got that filled -

Surely that Scandinavian magician?

[Clever Richard]

As someone who is only an occasional visitor to this thread, my reading of the last few pages suggests the preparations for the imminent SAR contract are running smoothly apart from the following minor points:


1. The AW189 will be late and the crews originally scheduled to fly them are hastily being retrained on the S-92.


2. When the AW189 is certificated, the temporary S-92 crews will be retrained on the AW189.


3. One of the original proposed bases (Manston) is now unavailable and an alternative has yet to be found.


4. The SAR Training Manager has yet to be nominated.


Is that a fair assessment of the ground truth?

[jimf671]

Since you know so much Jim then tell us what NVG setup is being used as you clearly are at the hub of Bristow's operation....?

The statement published "latest" technology so the query stands.


This stuff is about what you are allowed to buy, where you are allowed to go with it and what you are allowed to do with it. (http://www.pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/itar.html)

If you are amongst the favoured special people then you get to buy some of the better Generation 3 Thin Film NVIS. These are not on the internet pricelist. When you are allowed to buy them you bite their hand off in spite of the price because tomorrow some f3ckw1t might start a war and then you'll have to wait years for the good kit.

[jimf671]

As someone who is only an occasional visitor to this thread, my reading of the last few pages suggests the preparations for the imminent SAR contract are running smoothly apart from the following minor points:

1. The AW189 will be late and the crews originally scheduled to fly them are hastily being retrained on the S-92.

2. When the AW189 is certificated, the temporary S-92 crews will be retrained on the AW189.

3. One of the original proposed bases (Manston) is now unavailable and an alternative has yet to be found.

4. The SAR Training Manager has yet to be nominated.

Is that a fair assessment of the ground truth?

1. Minor aspects of the AW189 were always going to be late without impacting entry into SAR service. Not many now betting on AW189 at Inverness on April Fools Day. Many of the aircrew are expected to be the highly-capable Bristow Transition Team who are experienced S-92 guys anyway and can fill the gap until the Managed Transition aircrew are trained.

2. Inevitably. Any with AW139 type-rating will be on a short program.

4. Early Bristow publicity about the UK SAR team listed Paul Richardson as Training Manager but he's an engineering guy. Also Tony Campbell as SAR Rearcrew Training Coordinator. Rowan Greenwood joined in June from the CAA in a training role but is now Director Global SAR Operations.

[Vie sans frontieres]

What Bristow are using is top-end ITAR-controlled commercially available at time of purchase.

Jimf671

You're doing it again. Quoting what you've seen in a press release, a website or a glossy brochure and re-broadcasting it as gospel. Have you actually seen these 'top-end' NVG? Sumpor Stylee seems pretty close to the action and he/she appears to be suggesting that what they're planning on using are anything but 'top end'.

[jimf671]

Not a bit of it Vie.

I did refer to the notes I have on file from a telecon of 2012.


Vie, nobody outside of a few specialist military units, mainly in the USA, gets to use the world's best NVIS. The important thing about NVIS is not that you can see in the dark but that the Taliban don't get them. ITAR controls this and not cash.

£60k will put very good goggles on 4 civilian heads if you are in an allied country and can demonstrate the correct controls. Then there are the power supplies, some display mods and the extra warning devices required by the regulators. Chicken-feed when compared with the cost of initial and continuing training across 10 or 11 years of aviation operations.

And SAR Force aren't using the world's best NVIS either. (And the poor sods on the ground are still using grotty old kit most of the time too. Ughhh.)

[[email protected]]

And SAR Force aren't using the world's best NVIS either maybe not but they are pretty damn good and a whole lot better than not using them at all:ok:

[jimf671]

... a whole lot better than not using them at all:ok:

Gets my vote.

[Vie sans frontieres]

So to cut a long story short, you haven't seen them. They were described as 'the latest night vision technology', you were told they were 'top end' and what do you know. They may not be after all.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

TOTD - any guess how long it takes to convert pilots onto type and then into SAR role on an S92? It's certainly not as short as a month for either element:ok:


My guess is 0 weeks and 0 days because I have heard (though I haven't seen with my own eyes so it may not be true ;)) that Bristow may have some S-92 SAR crews already. So, will it take 5 months to convert S-92 SAR crews onto NVG? I think not. And if the NVG training isn't complete by 1 April 15, will it stop Lossie closing? We'll see...

[jimf671]

Vie, the US DDTC manage a regime of shifting sands so we will only know if we go to buy some goggles NOW.

[jimf671]

S-92 have been available with an NVG fit at 2 bases since last summer. Little bits of information are out there indicating that not only Sumburgh and Stornoway guys but the Transition Team and some of those destined for other bases have been flying them.

And if you were Bristow would you have your Transition Team doing AW189 simulator work and flying the O&G aircraft and prototypes during the same period? You'd be stupid not to, surely. The DfT man is watching.

[Clever Richard]

jimf671,


Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. I shall try to keep up in future!


CD

[[email protected]]

TOTD - there are 2 flts worth of S-92 crews who are probably trained up to speed on NVG but those 2 flts worth have to keep on providing the capability at those flights.

In the next 14 months there have to be another 7 flts worth of crews trained on type and in role including NVG - whether or not that is possible depends on the size of the training empire and the availability of the aircraft - are there actually enough instructors to do the training yet?

Most of the mil personnel in the managed transition are still in the mil and haven't even started their type and role training yet - it sounds like a big ask to me and one must ask the question about how operationally competent/capable the transition teams, who will pick up the slack, are going to be if there is to be a seamless transfer of ownership without capability gaps.

[jimf671]

I suggest that the number of such flights, if we assume that they include only the operational flights and the transition team, is three. If we then look at the fact that there are also aircrew out there who took the plunge and left early to join Bristow plus others who joined from other sources then maybe there are more than three. Many of us here know some of those guys and know that they are out there flying Bristow SAR aircraft.

Why would it not be so?

[Sumpor Stylee]

Try zero. Nobody is flying a Bristow aircraft on NVG hence the non winch equipped airframe to commence training. Majority of the ex military incomers have no glass cockpit experience. Some are struggling to get to grips with the technology not to mention the use of NVIS when combining such with glass cockpit etc. The individuals concerned are doing their utmost and committing their time but lack of organisation and leadership is where the failings and associated delays will be. Whether they get away with it by delivering on time remains to be seen, what will be delivered also is open to debate.

April 1st, the day of fools awaits......:{

And if they're so well manned up why is the publicly broadcast face of Bristow oil and gas ringing previous applicants arrogantly telling them why they should want to work for Bristow and slandering other operators despite the non commuting roster being insisted at remote bases where commuting was the norm since 2007 and even before then for some during Bristow's previous tenure???

[[email protected]]

It's all going terribly well.............................................:hmm:

[P3 Bellows]

Standby for the continual drip drip drip of misery from the one who says he hopes for a successful outcome:D

Crab; I'm so glad I don't have to work with you. You must be an absolute misery to work with.

I think we should call you "Captain Fantastic" from now on as you are clearly a flying God.

[[email protected]]

Crab; I'm so glad I don't have to work with you. You must be an absolute misery to work with. not sure why you think that but you would be 100% wrong.

Just because I know a bit about flying training (only been a QHI since 1989) and SAR training in particular (since 1990) doesn't make me a 'flying God' but it does allow me to pass comment on the sort of stuff I have delivered for many years in different roles:ok:

If you know better I will gladly bow to your superior knowledge.

I don't know the inner workings of the Bristow training machine but, when people who do - like sumpor stylee- have what appears to be valid information, who am I to argue?

[P3 Bellows]

Captain Fantastic,

I have no superior knowledge compared to your good self. I'm sure of that.

You are basing your criticism of the process based on what you read on here. Give me strength!

I would be surprised if anyone on the "inside" was posting here.

[[email protected]]

And you are basing your faith and belief in the process on what??????

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Crab,

You may turn out to be right that SAR is going to hell in a handcart, but with five months to go, you are too forceful in stating this as an inevitable fact. I'm aware that the existing S-92 bases cannot be abandoned to provide cover at Inverness (but, really, thank you for pointing this out :yuk:), but I'm pretty sure that Bristow would consider paying some overtime to the qualified individuals to allow them to man the existing and new bases simultaneously if that's what it takes to overcome any short-term deficiency in crews. And if, by April, noone has got the hang of NVG ops, will this stop the handover? Bristow and politicians alike will claim that a serviceable but temporarily-non-NVG S-92 (or AW189) offers a better capability than an NVG- and water-boiler-equipped but unserviceable Sea King. Would you approve of this? No. Would this be an ideal situation? No. Would it stop the transition from mil to civ? Probably not (but unlike you, I don't claim to know for sure).

TOTD

PS Sumpor, is it unreasonable to use a non-winch airframe for NVG training? Assuming (please correct me if I'm wrong) that there is no appetite for Bristow to do NVG winching, it seems a fair use of assets. I don't doubt that the work-up is a challenge, but with 5 months to run and plenty of darkness to practise in, I would guess that there may still be time to create enough people with enough proficiency.


lack of organisation and leadership is where the failings and associated delays will be


Don't worry, many of the ex-mil guys will feel right at home...

[[email protected]]

TOTD - I haven't said anywhere that SAR is going to hell in a handcart - to my knowledge, Bristow have a series of contingency plans to cover such eventualities as the 189 not getting SAR certification on time.

I know they had to prove to DfT that they could provide the service even if things went wrong.

However, I'm not surprised that there are teething problems and I am sure they will be overcome - but I do hope the MCA are honest about any shortfalls or reduction in capability during the transition.

We all know that eventually the SAR service will be very good but a lot of 'smoke and mirrors' has been used to gloss over the tricky bit in the middle when an ounce of honesty would go a lot further to assuaging onlookers' worries.

PS, I don't think overtime is much of an option when the European working time directive is taken into account.

[jimf671]

... an ounce of honesty ...

.. would be very helpful.

[Vie sans frontieres]

I would be surprised if anyone on the "inside" was posting here.

I bet they would be if it was going well and and they had something to brag about. ;)

[SeaKingDriver]

Bearing in mind the unfounded negative response from the (uninformed) press and public when privatised SAR was first announced, frankly I'm not surprised if Bristow are keeping their cards close to their chest. Any hint of things not going to plan A and the media machine will run away with it. We've all seen it happen before in the military!

The fact is, I'm sure those who need to know, know!

[P3 Bellows]

The fact is, I'm sure those who need to know, know!

SKD - I'm sure you're right. It's sad though that some like Jim, VSF and Captain Fantastic think that if Bristows management are not in the chat rooms here pandering to their needs and interests, there is a cover-up.

I'm sure they have far better things to do.

[Vie sans frontieres]

It certainly seems as though they've left themselves quite a lot to do. Too much some might say.

[snaggletooth]

Crab; I'm so glad I don't have to work with you. You must be an absolute misery to work with.


Au contraire. The gentleman in question is known as 'The Laughing QHI' in some circles, and with good reason. A pure professional and a pleasure to work with.

Good work Fella! :ok:

[[email protected]]

Cheque's in the post Snag:ok::ok:

[Clever Richard]

It has been stated that 'those in the know' are unlikely to be posting on this thread.


The vitriol contained in some of the responses to comments questioning if things are going smoothly are suggestive of, at the very least, an emotional attachment to the project and, more likely, a vested interest in it.


All of which would imply that 'those in the know' are indeed posting here and very actively too.

[jimf671]

Vitriol? That's kinda like .. em .. sumpor, so that can't be right. :E

[Norma Snockers]

Crab; I'm so glad I don't have to work with you. You must be an absolute misery to work with.

You couldn't be further from the truth, You would be hard pushed to find a more knowledgeable and professional aviator, who has been responsible for developing many of those who are in fact going to work with Bristow and wouldn't be where they are without his help. It is in fact your loss, and looking at your posts, you could do with some of his humour :)

[[email protected]]

OMG - this is going to cost me a fortune:ok:;)

[leopold bloom]

And he made his fair share of tea.:ok: (for a pilot)

[Sumpor Stylee]

Always a happy crew room with JEvs about I'm being told.....:ok:

[snaggletooth]

Which one? There have been two JEv's in the SAR Force; one on 22, one on 202, both Sqn QHIs. Oh never mind, they were both such good eggs I'd be happy for either of them to father my children! Good luck to them both.

[[email protected]]

The 22 Sqn one - not the first time I've been outed on pprune SS:ok:

[inputshaft]

I seem to remember the 202 Sqn one was much better looking

.......but weren't we all in those days:)

[Clever Richard]

Godwin's Law states' "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1".


Similarly, I propose a law for PPrune threads along the lines of:


As a PPrune thread grows longer, and a commenter feels they are starting to lose the argument, the probability of revealing the name of their antagonist approaches 1.


Given that his anonymity has been lifted a number of times by those unable to counter his arguments successfully I propose the above be known as 'Crab's Law'.


Any seconders?

[ShyTorque]

Re NVG and the length of time it might take to train crews.. As an ex military NVG instructor who helped convert a civilian SAR outfit to use them, it seems to me that some are forgetting that civilian SAR ops don't need to be covert.

What requirement is there for winching under NVG? Surely, there isn't one. Use the gogs for nav assist to fly to the scene but go white light once there. Make the place like daylight and look out using the naked eye. It makes life much more simple, rather than practice bleeding!

[leopold bloom]

Seconded.:ok:

[leopold bloom]

What requirement is there for winching under NVG? Surely, there isn't one. Use the gogs for nav assist to fly to the scene but go white light once there. Make the place like daylight and look out using the naked eye. It makes life much more simple, rather than practice bleeding! That's the way it is done in the Mil (SAR), getting there is sometimes the tricky bit.

[Clever Richard]

Two good posts in quick succession, well done Mr Bloom.:ok:

[[email protected]]

Shy, the RAF SAR Force is well versed in mixing white light and NVG and you are right, winching on purely NVG references is less than ideal since the relatively poor visual acuity (20/35 at best) on goggles means that very accurate positioning is difficult so white light references are preferable.

The problem is when to transfer from NVG to white light and that depends greatly on the conditions at the time - light levels, cloud, rain etc - we teach pilots to approach the scene on goggles and switch on hover/flood/steerable spot lights to see how much 'blowback' (like using full beam in fog) they get.

Sometimes you can get a good white light picture early and use that to establish the hover for the recce, sometimes you end up completing the recce on goggles and only switch to white light fully just before winching - it depends on the situation and available references.

This where being able to open the cockpit sliding door (a la Wessex and Sea King) really helps - shame that isn't an option with S92 or AW 189!

Over the water for a very small vessel or a person, an NVG hover is often best (if HT/AHT isn't workable) as it often gives you a decent visual horizon to work from - again it depends on the night and the wind (light winds leave you in a recirculating ball of spray which is horribly disorientating on NVG).

Because of the variability of the conditions, a lot of training is required, in different conditions, to make sure the crews can deal with whatever they are faced with. A short 'here are NVGs chaps, it's just more hovering' course might look OK on paper but really won't be adequate unless you are just ticking boxes.

Add in the fact that many flights have to deal with everything from flat calm overwater to ****ty conditions in blowing snow in the hills then you can see that a proper NVG training package will be required.

Hopefully the goggles on the new SAR service will be at least as good as the NG700s currently used by the SAR Force.

Crab's Law - like it. It usually starts with name calling and personal insults before the 'outing' but I have pretty thick skin.

[jimf671]

Thanks you Crab. :ok:

If you hadn't turned up then I was expecting these issues to run to ten pages. :ugh:

[[email protected]]

What, instead of the 61 we are on now;):ok:

[That SAR Chap]

We teach...

They teach...

End of an era and very sorry to see you go.

[TwoStep]

Some Dutch spotters claim they have seen an AW139 in HM Coastguard colours at AW's Verigiate plant - possibly one of the backup aircraft?

AW139 I-EASS (71) HM Coast Guard full c/s

[jimf671]

Such a version of Plan B had been suggested but not corroborated.

How many side windows did the '139' have?

[shetlander]

I am pretty sure that registraion along with I-RAIQ are temporary registrations issued to newly produced AW aircraft.

Both registrations feature on numerous airframes.

[jimf671]

Presumably, this tip is from the post by Vermeer on scramble.nl, dated 27th October 2014. (I-EASS is definitely an AW temporary that has appeared on other 139s.)

Vermeer also lists three AW189 in his spotting report which, unfortunately, is an indicator for him knowing the difference and I-EASS indeed being a 139.

So, if we therefore assume that it is a correct type identification, what possible reasons could there be for new production of such a 139 other than Plan B2 (B1 = S-92) being in operation to accommodate AW189 lateness on the MAIN contract for the UK SAR Helicopter Service?

- Incorrect identification of the colour scheme and branding by Vermeer
-
-
-
-

Please fill in the blanks.

[[email protected]]

That SAR Chap - thank you:ok:

[TwoStep]

Bristow had previously said in its financial briefings on SAR-H that if the AW189 was not ready, AW139s could stand in temporarily.

[[email protected]]

Where are they going to magic a bunch of UKSAR spec 139s from though?

[detgnome]

see post 1213 ^^^^^^!

[[email protected]]

Well they are going to need up to 8 to cover Inverness, Manston, St Athan and Prestwick next year - any spotters seen that many??

[shetlander]

I can't say that I have seen any 139's... But I have seen another Coastguard 189 at Norwich :ok:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7544/15628435890_6cc748da28_c_d.jpg

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5606/15194239323_dffa0c5399_c_d.jpg

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7582/15790833366_79c540c332_c_d.jpg

[jimf671]

Nice work MATE! :ok:

I note with considerable interest the detailed working items fitted on this aircraft and not on PT5 (I-PTFF). Also that it carries a registration that is a known AW temporary pre-delivery reg. The first aircraft production is known to be an Italian build.





Anyone seen certification?

[Older and Wiser]

So the Italians have built one SAR Cab, it is now down to AW's UK plant to build the rest!

[mmitch]

Has it been decided what the colour scheme will be for the civil SAR? Will it just be the Coastguard one? It is pretty important that the public can recognise it quickly when they might otherwise expect a yellow one!
mmitch.

[Sevarg]

O & W,
I think that it's the W in the AW that might be the problem. I hope they have changed there ways from the days when the MoD fed them royaly. Not only in producing the goods but also the spares backup. Fingers crossed on that one.
MMitch,
I don't think the colour will matter much if you wanting help. It didn't seem to be a problem at Lee or Portland. I guess in Scotland there was plenty of news items when the 'new' coastguard service started many years ago.
Also there have been a number of programs on TV where the colours of all the services have been well aired. I would say not a problem.

[britinusa]

A Question....Considering that the new helicopters are going to be carrying out rescues in the mountains, seas, disasters overland. Is the new service still going to be known as Coastguard Rescue Helicopters or something else?

I might have missed this answer way back in this thread..

[Vie sans frontieres]

The photos at the top of this page offer a bit of a clue.

[John Eacott]

Has it been decided what the colour scheme will be for the civil SAR? Will it just be the Coastguard one? It is pretty important that the public can recognise it quickly when they might otherwise expect a yellow one!
mmitch.

Or grey and red.

Even we Antipodeans know that UK SAR has had colours other than yellow for many, many decades :hmm:

[[email protected]]

Just nowhere near as many aircraft as the yellow ones;);)

[John Eacott]

Careful, crab@. We had lots more than you, once upon a time....

http://www.eacott.com.au/gallery/d/1426-2/RAF+Whirlwind+Fly+Navy.jpg

[3D CAM]

Nice one John.:D:D
3D

[snaggletooth]

'FLYNAV'

I don'geddit... :rolleyes:

[britinusa]

I wasn't asking about colour, and the Coastguard is an organisation which does what it says on the box. Guards the coast, are they going to still hold the title of coastguard helicopters even though less than half of all rescues will be over sea!

[[email protected]]

'FLYNAV' it's back to the days when we had a Navigator in the LHS and used to let them have a clutch now and again;)

[Peterspilot]

HMCG is the new owner of all UK SAR helicopters with Bristow being the contracted operator on their behalf. The scheme you see on the AW189 above will be standard (as is already the case at Stornoway, Sumburgh, Lee and Portland) on the AW189 and S92 aircraft across all 10 UK SAR bases. Any logic to do with over water or land operations is not applicable.

[jimf671]

I wasn't asking about colour, and the Coastguard is an organisation which does what it says on the box. Guards the coast, are they going to still hold the title of coastguard helicopters even though less than half of all rescues will be over sea!


I think you are getting the picture. I do not find it to be a pretty picture. Some assure me that it's OK because currently the old sailor's home is run by a carrier guy. I shall need some convincing.

[britinusa]

Thanks jimf671, I was just curious.

Does that mean the Coastguard will be co-coordinating the helicopters instead of the ARCC?

[Peterspilot]

No, all SAR helo call outs remain with the ARCC as is the case today.

[jimf671]

Thanks jimf671, I was just curious.

Does that mean the Coastguard will be co-coordinating the helicopters instead of the ARCC?

NO.

ARCC maintain their current role.

What the future physical and organisational location of the ARCC will be is another question. Since it is currently in the hands of those who understand aeronautics, rescue and control, and is located in a community where the issues are widely understood, I am not a fan of change. If we were changing to the Norwegian JRCC model then change might be worthwhile but I don't think that's on the table or even within the intellectual range of those influencing this.

The Coastguard control the brand and are the customer. They are currently controlling information about the implementation of the new service. The level of control tends to be a matter for concern for SAR partner agencies who require reassurance about capability and the manner of collaborative working.

[[email protected]]

And, worryingly, these are the same guys who think less CG stations with a big centralised blob of a comms centre is the way forward - that didn't work very well for the Fire Service did it?

[shetlander]

In response to the above the ARCC will continue to serve its purpose with the RAF, however the plans are for the MCA, specifically HM Coastguard, to take over this function for civil search and rescue. The RAF will continue to coordinate the response into military search and rescue.

Therefor, the MCA will be responsible for tasking their own helicopters.

[[email protected]]

They have always been able to task their own helicopters locally but nationally it has been co-ordinated by the ARCCK - having one do civil and the other military is a complete nonsense.

[leopold bloom]

The RAF will continue to coordinate the response into military search and rescue.
Roughly how many military search and rescue incidents occur each year? Can't be many, is it really a cost-effective proposal to retain all of the facilities and personnel of the ARCC at Kinloss if that is the case?:confused:

[shetlander]

They have always been able to task their own helicopters locally but nationally it has been co-ordinated by the ARCCK - having one do civil and the other military is a complete nonsense.


That WAS the case however the S92's under Bristow in the North of Scotland take their tastings from the ARCC. (Coastguard request scramble of a/c from ARCC)

Likewise with the CHC fir on the south coast, they take their taskings from ARCC now.

Ops normals are conducted through the ARCC on HF or Airwaves.

[[email protected]]

The CG assets were (for about the last 10 years) supposed to be tasked through the ARCCK but could self task within 30 nm of their CG MRCC and then advise the ARCCK.

The same happens with many mil units, the local CG give you a heads-up and then phone the ARCCK to get them to officially task you.

As Leopold says, there are so few military SAR jobs nowadays, it makes no sense to have separate tasking authorities.

[shetlander]

The CG assets were (for about the last 10 years) supposed to be tasked through the ARCCK but could self task within 30 nm of their CG MRCC and then advise the ARCCK.

Correct, but this is no longer the case. This stopped from a about the time that Bristows took over the S92's at Sumburgh and Stornoway.

They will only accept a tasking from ARCC. The scramble lines that the CG used to use stopped and was taken over by the ARCC.

[jimf671]

My recollection, having been at ARCC on that day, is that CG independent tasking of their SAR aircraft, and Nimrod ops, ended on the same day. 31st March 2010.

[jimf671]

AW189 delays mean Bristow will fly AW139 on UK Coastguard contract | Helihub - the Helicopter Industry Data Source (http://helihub.com/2014/11/19/aw189-delays-mean-bristow-will-fly-aw139-on-uk-coastguard-contract/) :ugh:

[leopold bloom]

A new type late into service, what a surprise.:ugh:

[Innit]

Does anyone know when the CHC machines wrap up their operations?

[jimf671]

2 x Bristow AW189 to take over at Lee 1st April 2017.

Portland end service 30th June 2017.

[[email protected]]

Strange how TUPE seems to apply to those guys but not the military................

[leopold bloom]

Back to the point, can someone confirm, or not, that ARCC will task and coordinate the new service?:\

[snaggletooth]

Initially the ARCC(K) will continue to task the assets as they have the infrastructure and expertise so to do. Eventually the aspiration is for this function to move down to the south of England and be assimilated into/assumed by the MCA. The plan is on hold at present as there is no money left.

Allegedly.

[jungliebeefer]

Crab, you makes your choices .....

[snakepit]

Strange how TUPE seems to apply to those guys but not the military................

The statement explains it all nicely.

[heli1]

So where are the AW139s likely to go if not Lee or Portland ?

[jimf671]

Flight Global
Bristow details AW189 contingency for UK SAR contract - 11/20/2014 - Flight Global (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/bristow-details-aw189-contingency-for-uk-sar-contract-406313/)

[Spanish Waltzer]

According to figures released by the Ministry of Defence under a freedom of information request, around 20 RAF pilots and 30 rear crew have been allowed to move across to Bristow under a process referred to as managed transition. Approximately five Royal Navy pilots and 10 rear crew are also covered by the same process.

Making the assumption that each of the ten bases will have in the region of ten pilots and ten rear crew plus I understand there will be a few floating trainers etc then for the military to be only providing approx 25% of the final pilot numbers seems a bit thin. Rear crew numbers seem more appropriate. Or is it that the 25 does not include the mil pilots who appreciated a managed transition was never going to put their interests first so took the initiative to jump a bit early and temporarily into oil and gas cockpits to gain some type experience before being moved back into SAR seats?

[jimf671]

There appears to be a substantial body of PVR and other ex-mil in the recent intakes. Add to that the traditional obfuscation of FOI outputs which means that the most likely numbers for Managed Transition are 70 to 80. Roughly 70% MT are probably RAF, so it appears that quality and quantity have gone some way to overcoming decades-old prejudices at HMS Bristow.

[cyclic]

But with the closure of Manston in May this year and the subsequent sale of the site for redevelopment, Bristow has been searching for a suitable alternative. It says “it will execute a contingency plan” to ensure SAR coverage in the region and will make an announcement “ in due course”.

Just hang on while we work out what that contingency is. I do love a bit of management speak. We are a reactionary industry so trying to plan something in advance maybe a step too far!

[Clever Richard]

I think they will lift the Lydd on the contingency plan soon.:ok:


(See what I did there)

[Vie sans frontieres]

So after years of Lee on Solent and Portland wrestling over the same bit of English Channel, we're now going to have Lee on Solent and Lydd wrestling over the same bit of English Channel. Meanwhile, if Humberside go u/s virtually the entire North Sea is without a SAR aircraft. Whose f^#king idea was this?