UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread

[ericferret]

Nice to see the first S92 flying at Humberside yesterday. A friend of mine has had a tour of the new hangar. His words "superb".

[jimf671]

Nice to see the first S92 flying at Humberside yesterday. ...


SAR partners get to meet them next Saturday.

[shetlander]

Some more cabs nearing completion in the States.

Video Link:

HM Coastguard - Sikorsky S92 - Shipping (http://youtu.be/OHcpyGT1aDw)

[jimf671]

N235U was the delivery ID of G-MCGI that was registered on the 19th of December 2014 to BHL, Dyce.

[shetlander]

G-MCGE currently based at Humberside.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7509/16068199299_f33a8e996d_c_d.jpg

[llamaman]

Nice to see the first S92 flying at Humberside yesterday. A friend of mine has had a tour of the new hangar. His words "superb".

I assume it still has the roof on it? Unlike the one at Inverness ;)

[500e]

Bristow World covers preparations for U.K. SAR contract, Target Zero and CEO interview | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/30153)

[satsuma]

To deliver on the Gap SAR contract, Bristow deployed four new Sikorsky S-92 helicopters that feature the latest SAR technology, including night vision

Oh please! Does the omission of the word goggles mean they're referring to the FLIR here? Everyone from the cleaner to the Managing Director knows they haven't been using NVG on the gapsar contract. Why the need for such spin?

[jimf671]

Don't start me! :ugh:

[jimf671]

Balfour Beatty join a long line of visitors to northern Scotland whose efforts have blown away.

There is a meeting at Humberside later today.

Inverness? Your guess is as good as mine now.

[Same again]

'The Daily Mail' now has serious competition from the new 'The Daily Jimf671'. We are all doomed I tell you - all doomed :rolleyes:

[jimf671]

Bristow Humberside

Border ITV
Mountain Rescue Team helicopter training | Border - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/border/update/2015-01-17/mountain-rescue-team-helicopter-training/)
New helicopter to replace Sea King - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/border/story/2015-01-17/new-helicopter-to-replace-sea-king/)

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/10917899_1036817709666858_2421653315669044715_n.jpg?oh=f5f2f 2a1677e8530a010c8bba63e9b46&oe=556B7A64
The ladrador is the only one that has twigged to the great heater in the S-92!



ADS-B
G-MCGE - Bristow Helicopters - Aircraft info and flight history - Flightradar24 (http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/g-mcge/#54b72ba)



Oops, sorry Same Again, that's two in one day. Does that blow your theory?

[Same again]

Nah. You don't fool me. I predict that normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.

[jimf671]

Normal?

On pprune? :confused:

[Al-bert]

Good to hear "it's got GPS so it can hover very very carefully... and can carry 11 team members". That's nearly as many as a Wessex or Sea King.........but it does have a rear ramp, and is fast and nice and shiney! :ugh:

[jimf671]

Yes, fast and nice and shiney. Excellent.

Not sure about the 11th seat. Is the winchman on the belt and standing? The official line appears to be "Capacity: 21 persons as required ..."

You had an official line on Wessex and Sea King didn't you Albert? Tell us about the official line when it's dark and there is nobody about.

[Al-bert]

'Official Line' ? :confused:

[leopold bloom]

On the Sea King Mk3/3A there were officially 19 passenger seats as far as I can remember. However, practically, far fewer due to equipment, weight, C of G, temperature/performance, fuel, weather etc. A Wessex had far fewer seats but not sure what the official line was, probably two men and a dog with a small bag.:) When push came the shove you just crammed people in. Most I had in the back of a Sea King was 24 but the majority of them were children.:D

[Al-bert]

16 in a Wessex but I recall more than twenty in a 72 Sqn cab during the Antrim Princess rescue (not my cab). :ok:

My comment re the S92 was more aimed at the MRT 'Expert' who believes that GPS is a)new and b) anything to do with hovering. I just love 'experts' and journalists! :E

[jimf671]

I think there have been three S-92 cabin layouts in service in just the last two years so we should let the guy score a few points for any figure that's close! :)

[Sevarg]

Al-B,
Not sure but did I not read somewhere that the GPS was used for the hover. It would be better than the doppler, which on the BHL S61s, used to see the winchman and chunner off in what ever direction it felt like.
It was proposed that GPS was used years back but kicked into the long grass due to the fear of jitter having the same effect.
Talking of jitter has anybody ever seen or had the GPS run away due to jitter? Can't say I have but maybe I'm lucky or my attention wandered.:hmm:

[The SAR RC]

The GPS can be used to maintain a precision hover over a point in space - but only over water, not over land.

[Al-bert]

.......and since whatever it is you are trying to rescue from the sea is almost certainly moving due to tide, wind, surface current, downdraught or it's own motive power I guess that GPS won't help too much over the water either!

Only ever got the Jitters pre AOC's inspection - marching never a strong point! :}

[The SAR RC]

I previously described Position Hold, where the aircraft is held over a precise lat long. The more commonly used alternative is Velocity Hold where the pilot making the selection can set a datum baded on the currents/drifts you refer to. This has proven to be useful in the past, especially where extremely high hovers have been required to try and mitigate against the S92's very powerful downwash.

[leopold bloom]

It would be better than the doppler, which on the BHL S61s, used to see the winchman and chunner off in what ever direction it felt like. No surprise there, some ugly customers among the winchies.;)

[NRDK]

The GPS can be used to maintain a precision hover over a point in space - but only over water, not over land.
errr?? No. Will hold a GPS position anywhere you ask it to. The height hold with RAD may no be so great over terrain, BAR ALT may be better....you can vary the AW139 modes to do this.

[Darren999]

The S92 will hover hold over land, any place you put it really.RA works well

[The SAR RC]

Sorry, I'll rephrase what I wrote. Position Hold and Velocity Hold on the S92 tend to only be used over the water where there is an absence of close external references.

[lsd]

Yeah! To about one foot on full power checks when no tie-down base available!!

[Flounder]

It's AHRS (Altitude Heading Reference System), which uses gyros, accelerometers and magnetic sensor units, that enables the S92A to accurately hold position in the hover.

AHRS will reference GPS for it's position, GPS does not ensure an accurate hover but merely advises the aircraft it is where it thinks it is.

AHRS allows the aircraft to hold a position (PHLD) or fly lateral and longitudinal references (VHLD) to maintain position with a vessel or other drifting target.

AHRS is also responsible for enabling the SAR AFCS modes for transition down functions.

Not just shiny and faster.

[satsuma]

Have you seen the banner advert at the top of this page?


HM Coastguard's National Maritime Operations Centre (NMOC) provides the function of the UK Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre (ARCC) as required by international treaty obligations and UK national requirements. Search and Rescue (SAR) coordination of all aviation incidents and the tasking, deployment and coordination of UK aviation SAR assets within the air, land and sea areas of the UK Search and Rescue Region (UK SRR) is the primary purpose of this function.

The Senior Aeronautical Operations Officer SAOO is responsible to the duty Maritime Operations Commander, via the duty Aeronautical Operations Controller (AOC) for the efficient coordination of aviation SAR incidents, and the efficient and effective tasking, deployment and coordination of UK SAR aviation assets, within the land and sea areas of the UK SRR.


Salary £24,185 - £26,120


What the hell will they be paying the Junior Aeronautical Operations Officers?

[jimf671]

... ... What the hell will they be paying the Junior Aeronautical Operations Officers?

I expect that there will be no such animal. Do you think junior staff may morph from standard issue Coastie?

However ...

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

Aeronautical Operations Controller
Job id: 61362872
Location: Fareham, Hampshire
Salary: £36,487 per annum plus allowances
Company: Maritime Coastguard Agency
Job Type: Permanent
Date posted: 13/01/2015 22:00
Job Description: National Maritime Operations Centre

There couldn’t be a more exciting time to join Her Majesty’s Coastguard. This emergency service has recently gone through a major modernisation and harmonisation programme and is looking to recruit those with desire to play a key role in the delivery of air safety and search and rescue.

HM Coastguard's National Maritime Operations Centre (NMOC) provides the function of the UK Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre (ARCC) as required by international treaty obligations and UK national requirements. SAR coordination of all aviation incidents and the tasking, deployment and coordination of UK aviation SAR assets within the air, land and sea areas of the UK Search and Rescue Region (UK SRR) is the primary purpose of this function.

If you can combine, a proven track record in command and control, strong leadership skills, and are highliy motivated and a team player, then come and join our highly skilled work force.

The AOC reports to the duty Maritime Operations Commander ensuring the efficient coordination of aviation SAR incidents, efficient and effective tasking, deployment and coordination of UK SAR aviation assets, within the land and sea areas of UK SRR. They are also responsible for the performance and effectiveness of the Aeronautical Operations Specialist (AOS) and Aeronautical Operations Officers (AOO) under their supervision.

The role will also involve responsibility and accountability for the quality and direction of service delivery as well as informing line management of any key issues and implementing actions and outcomes from audits and the quality assurance processes. No two days will ever be the same in this varied, exciting and challenging role.

We are looking for looking for strong leaders who can work as a team member within a shift system, play an active part in the senior management team and enthuse others to deliver the MCA’s vision to be the best maritime safety organisation in the world, driving progress towards safer lives, safer ships, and cleaner seas.

You will be expected to travel away from home for training at different locations as required.

As an aviation professional you will be expected to have experience of team management and asset coordination in a response environment. This level of experience would not normally be gained in less than 5 years including 3 years managing at a tactical level. Applicants with less experience would be considered based on evidence of competence relating to job specific knowledge and skills such as evidence of success in leadership roles in an emergency response organisation.

This position attracts up to £5,000 in allowances on successful completion of training

To find out more information about this post and to apply online please visit our website, read guidance and search for Maritime and Coastguard Agency jobs.

Closing date: 19th January

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

Check out "... responsible for the performance and effectiveness of the Aeronautical Operations Specialist (AOS) and Aeronautical Operations Officers (AOO) under their supervision ... "

This is clearly not going to have Flight Lieutenants on PA Scales rushing to PVR!

No sign of ads for Aeronautical Operations Specialist.

[Al-bert]

AHRS allows the aircraft to hold a position (PHLD) or fly lateral and longitudinal references (VHLD) to maintain position with a vessel or other drifting target.

Sounds great Flounder - we used to have pilots to do that :}

[[email protected]]

And I think the A in AHRS stands for attitude not altitude:ok:

[More lookout]

I'm with Al Bert. Pilots used to do the hovering in my day. Automation is great, up to the point of failure. What ever the advances in Gizzmos and stated failure probabilities. A SAR crew must be fully proficient in all modes including the pure human element as well.

[TipCap]

I remember my days of the Whirlwind when everything was done manually. No autopilot, auto hover - just pilot and winchop skill and then when I flew the Wessex, wow 2 engines and an autostab - woohoo :ok:

[britinusa]

The closing date for the CG ARCC has now moved to the 26 Jan. Hmmmm I wonder if they are having trouble finding the right qualified people???

[Lingo Dan]

The "long" SARTU SAR course also used to be known as the "computer-out" course. 215-219 RRPM!

[[email protected]]

All the super-automation is fine in some situations but even the VHLD (if that is what it is called) will only cope with steady state scenarios - an object in the water in any meaningful sea state will not move in a predictable and steady fashion - it will require pilot (or AHT) input to keep up. The automation is an aid but most winching jobs will still need stick and poles skills from the pilot.

The Sea King 3A has an auto-hover capability up to 200' and a HT you can trim (either on the cyclic or the HT controller) to give a relative hover and it has a very flexible TD SAR mode.

So actually the S92 is just newer and shinier:ok:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I'm with Al Bert. Pilots used to do the hovering in my day. Automation is great, up to the point of failure. What ever the advances in Gizzmos and stated failure probabilities. A SAR crew must be fully proficient in all modes including the pure human element as well.


Agreed. One only has to look at the various accidents in recent years (NB not all RW cases) where over-reliance on automation has been a significant factor to realize that basic pilot skills still have a crucial part to play...one of the benefits of the generous RAF SAR training allowance was regular practice by day and night of (a) what to do at the moment when the steam-driven AFCS throws a wobbly and (b) how to continue the job once the initial malfunction/fauilure has been addresed.

[Flounder]

I wasn't suggesting that VHLD and PHLD are the answer to everything or that solely using automation is way the S92 is flown.

I only aimed to clarify how the S92 maintained position on automatics in SAR AFCS modes. I use VHLD to assist whilst flying night decks as it retains a useful reference point should you lose references on the vessel. It aids to stability ensuring a better service to the WO and ultimately the WM. It is very capable when I've carried out transfers to dinghys or a raft of small vessels when operating above 100ft with no references.

It all adds greatly to safety but I suppose the "I did it manual in a Wessex" attitude will always say how it was so much harder in their day. I wouldn't know, I've only flown over 1000 hours on S92 in SAR and 7000 hours in total so I'm still a young 'un compared to the wise counsel who sit in judgement on here.

I think it's churlish to deny that the S92 is able SAR platform after over 7 years of service and much refinement in all modes of operation.

[nessboy]

Well done to you all....first class job. :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOuFDON8BtI&feature=youtu.be

[Al-bert]

Flounder - I'm not knocking the S92!
It looks lovely (and shiny) and I'd have loved to fly it I'm sure! BTW we didn't fly Wessex 'in manual' like the Whirlwind - THEY had it rough! :ok:

[TipCap]

I did my basic SAR training in a Mk7 whirlwind - now that was interesting :p

[Grumpyasever]

I once saw a Dragonfly demo a net pick up!:rolleyes:

[Fareastdriver]

On the Bristow Sycamore, wooden blades, no hydraulics and spring trim wheels. The pilot operated the winch by means of a mirror. When the winchman hooked up the survivor sometimes it couldn't lift both out of the water.

That's when the winchman stayed in the dinghy, the pilot winched up the survivor who then had to find his own way into the cabin. He would be taken on shore and then the aircraft would return for the winchman.

All on a diet of Avgas.

[jimf671]

Sycamore, Dragonfly, Whirlwind, ...
Lots of scope for a UK SAR History thread.

I did search for one but not found.

Any Bristow Manston aircrew around?

[Al-bert]

My uncle was on ASR HSL's before helicopters! They weren't so good in the mountains though :rolleyes:

[leopold bloom]

Leonardo da Vinci's Aerial Screw Invention (http://www.da-vinci-inventions.com/aerial-screw.aspx)

[[email protected]]

Oh, so that was your first SAR type - always did wonder....;);)

[jimf671]

Sikorsky S-92 G-MCGF made its way from Stornoway to Inverness last week and was flying around the Inner Moray Firth on Friday. It is currently sitting in the new Inverness hangar. :cool:

Looking good to go. :ok:



Based on the presence off the aircraft and the remnants of pallets of building materials, I'd say the roof is fixed. Pity about the insulation material strewn across the area. Hopefully, it is gas-turbine-friendly insulation. :ugh:

[P3 Bellows]

Jim

Hopefully, it is gas-turbine-friendly insulation. :ugh:

You really just can't help yourself can you. I bet the boys and girls from Inverness can't wait to meet you. :ok:

[jimf671]

You're right P3. I can't help myself. It's the training. It makes me a bit FOD-sensitive.

[[email protected]]

Oh dear P3, did you shoot off at a tangent, jumping to the wrong conclusions?

Jim is rightly concerned that a building site is not a good place to operate helicopters from, especially if your contractors don't understand the importance of keeping the area clean and tidy.

[Same again]

What would those visually-challenged and inept crews and engineers at Inverness do without you?

[[email protected]]

What would those visually-challenged and inept crews and engineers at Inverness do without you?
Hopefully not operate the aircraft until the contractors tidied the mess up;)

[Same again]

This theory is almost inconceivable considering that the crew were mere civilians I grant you. But, maybe, just maybe the engineers and crew considered FOD, did a FOD plod on the dispersal and then moved it away from the hangar to start it up? Now that really is thinking outside of the box - perhaps too far outside.

No doubt you would have cancelled all flying until those damnable trades people had cleaned up every last bit of material while you stood by with your board, wagging finger and disapproving look.

Last words of wit and wisdom to you of course.

[Al-bert]

au contraire SA - we had a Flt Sergeant to do the clip board and finger wagging duty whilst we drank tea :ok:

[3D CAM]

Al,
You know where that board would be if you tried that with a bunch of navvies!!:eek:
And when was the last time you saw engineers and crews doing a "FOD PLOD" at a major airport? That is why airports have industrial street/apron sweeping machines. But as the Concorde incident proved, anything can happen.
It becomes second nature, well it did to me and my fellow engineers, to pick up anything on the ramp that may cause damage. When the siren goes off you don't have time for a "FOD PLOD".
3D

[[email protected]]

No doubt you would have cancelled all flying until those damnable trades people had cleaned up every last bit of material while you stood by with your board, wagging finger and disapproving look.

Why would you let the building contractors make a mess and then clear it up yourself??? Who would allow a contractor who wasn't 'air-aware' to work in an aviation environment?? It all sounds very professional:(

[Al-bert]

3D When the siren goes off you don't have time for a "FOD PLOD".

that reminded me of a certain elderly corporal who, at an annual GDT refresher, when asked what were the signs of a near nuclear strike, replied FOD! :ok:

[Bluenose 50]

Crab - "Why would you let the building contractors make a mess and then clear it up yourself??? Who would allow a contractor who wasn't 'air-aware' to work in an aviation environment?? It all sounds very professionalhttp://www.pprune.org/ D94yEF6yUR8ykZ9ykd+ywD/AEmAy06EzVCFzlKGz1aJ0FeK0FiL0VqM0VuN0mCQ02GR1GeW1miX1mqY122a 2G+c2XGd2XSf2nqj3Hyk3YKp34Sr4Imu4ouw4o2x48DAwP///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAAA0ALAAAAAAPAA8AAAidABsIFAigYMGBC BsU/NBBA4YKBxECGCEixAcOGS5MeABgIAASJUiIAOFhAwYKEBh0VFjChMGXKTsCE EECAAoUJ2zeBMAAQcEQOnEGzXlgoc2cOVEAOJGzQEEOHl5KRUCgYIYNWDNgs CABgoMEBQTIxEBWqgIDA1YCoEABwIQIDxwoAEAgwEqFECDEXZDAQN27BAHwR VAgLWCJLxMGBAA7"

Errrr – It's about as professional as MOD/RAF at Kinloss circa early 2005 when the roof of the newly constructed Ops Building (details fuzzy – perhaps the MPA community can help) blew off and ended up at (mostly on or near) the runway and all hands (RAF equivalent) were called out to conduct a close quarters in-line abreast search of the runway to pick up the bits. During the same period of stormy weather the roof of the recently constructed nearby Tesco building in Forres also took orf threatening folks on the A96.
Interesting thing was that the shack opposite the ARCC housing the Supply Sqn Bar and the similarly constructed nearby MRT hut, both apparently built during the war (WWII) or not that long after, survived the tempest with no apparent damage.
Is the moral of the tale that building standards have regressed or that those who live(d) in glass houses shouldn't throw stones ?

[Same again]

Problem is Crab that Bristow can do nothing right as far as you Vie and Jim are concerned.

If they cancel flying due FOD you'd be on here telling everyone that they cannot complete a simple training flight due to late build of the hangar/poor contractors/ bad management/poor planning - you name it.

When they fly after storm damage you bleat about poor airmanship/bad decision making/ fyling despite FOD hazards - you name it.

It is all getting a bit silly now.

[212man]

It is all getting a bit silly now

Now? It's been pretty silly for years, I'd say!

[jimf671]

Problem is Crab that Bristow can do nothing right as far as you Vie and Jim are concerned. ... ...

Did Bristow build the hangar? I don't think so. I think Balfour Beatty built the hangar. The reason I think that is because Bristow and Balfour Beatty put a big effort into telling us that Balfour Beatty were building the Hangar. (And their name was all over the place during construction.)

Sometimes, in exposed locations in the north of Scotland, it gets windy. Sometimes, when it gets windy, things that shouldn't blow away do blow away.

Stornoway and Sumburgh bases are sorted, right?

Phew!



... ... It is all getting a bit silly now.

No kidding.

[[email protected]]

Problem is Crab that Bristow can do nothing right as far as you Vie and Jim are concerned. No, that isn't true at all - I know they are doing lots of things right as plenty of people I know work for them - it is posters like you who automatically assume any criticism of Bristow is unfair and biased and, as Jim has highlighted, it wasn't Bristow who built the hangar or created the mess.

[Same again]

Posters like me??

Last word is yours always Crab. Although I am told that you are no longer a SAR God, or even a SAR anybody. So perhaps you are no longer qualified to comment - on Bristow - or even Balfour Beatty?

Good night ladies.

[[email protected]]

Same again - my SAR pedigree goes back to instructing at SARTU as my first instructional tour in 1989 and finished last year after 14 years as a SAR pilot, flight QHI, Sqn training officer, CFS agent and part-time Standards pilot.

It would be interesting to know how many people there are in the new SAR organisation with equivalent or better quals.:)

Up to you whether or not you think my opinions count for anything - what qualifies you to pass judgement anyway?

[P3 Bellows]

Crab

It would be interesting to know how many people there are in the new SAR organisation with equivalent or better quals.

There is no doubting your experience but I would question your attitude. I have shared crew rooms and even worse, cockpits with the likes of yourself and frankly, they were a pain in the backside; the "I know everything there is to know and I've forgotten more than you will ever know" sort of attitude.

You have spent many years slagging off civil SAR on here and are then daft enough to think that by stopping posting for a few months it will all be forgotten and Bristows will welcome you with open arms. I think you have been very naive in your approach to getting a job in the new SAR world and you just come across as bitter and twisted now.

You clearly wanted a job with Bristows and you don't have one. If I were you, I'd have a good look in the mirror before you continue with your bitterness.

P3

[[email protected]]

P3 - you have never shared a crewroom or cockpit with me or you would know that I am not in the least bit the way you seem to believe.

I am not bitter - disappointed that my experience won't be used to help further the new SAR service but not bitter because they objected to my criticism. What were they actually afraid of??

In many respects they did me a favour - there comes an age when getting dragged out of bed in the wee small hours for a 4-hour search in sh*te weather rather loses its appeal - I think I have been there for a while.

I have new challenge which better utilises my 'allegedly' good instructional skills which I would have missed out on had I been part of the managed transition.

In short - don't try to judge me unless you actually know me - perhaps try talking to some of those that do before you point the finger.

[jimf671]

Like.



... - there comes an age when getting dragged out of bed in the wee small hours for a 4-hour search in sh*te weather rather loses its appeal - ...

Not the first time you have written that as I recall.

[Fareastdriver]

Shoudn't worry Crab. I made more money flying Bristows aircraft than I did flying them when I was employed by them. At one stage they were paying me truckloads of money to fly another company's aircraft.

Luckily I was in long enough to stack up a good pension.

[satsuma]

That all sounds very mercenary. There's more to life than money. Did you give any to the poor or needy or did you keep it all for yourself?

[jimf671]

Or did you give any to hard-pressed mountain rescue teams? Some of us are going to need new boots for the times when we have to walk all the way home. Surely that won't happen with Bristow, just as it never happened with the RAF and RN :hmm:, what with pilots being such terribly nice chaps. :ok:

[jimf671]

As I write this, G-MCGF from Bristow Inverness is heading for the hills. Just heading past Loch Glass behind Ben Wyvis and heading into the 'badlands' :) of the Northwest Highlands.

Have a good day chaps. There are certainly worse days for flying around the NW Highlands. Hope you took your cameras. :ok:

[shetlander]

Coastguard S92's sitting at Dyce during a cold night:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8594/15781924164_2369bec38e_z_d.jpg

Another S92 awaiting kitting out at Dyce:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7295/16420585341_62f0bb6295_z_d.jpg

[jimf671]

AW139 in HMCG colours reported around the Brecon Beacons.

Possibly G-CIJW, reg not confirmed.


A bit early for St Athan? Maybe just getting hill time which is no bad thing.

[jeepys]

No, it was CHC

[jimf671]

No, it was CHC

Thanks.

I see it. There is an AIS track for G-SARD.

Job or training?

[satsuma]

Has this turned into a thread for spotters?

[shetlander]

UK SAR gossip is obviously going through a quiet patch.

With regards to CHC aircraft, it was on a training flight.

[satsuma]

The calm before the storm?

[3D CAM]

Training??? No.... the Coastguard don't train!!!!:rolleyes:
3D

[satsuma]

Training??? No.... the Coastguard don't train!!!!

"It's often a bad sign when people defend themselves against charges that haven't been made." Christopher Hitchens.


I don't think anyone has ever suggested the Coastguard don't train. All that has been queried is the quantity and quality of the training and the adequacy of the training syllabus for training pilots and crewmen without a SAR background from scratch. This may change in the years to come but for the moment, the way their ab initio ambulance paramedics have been non-trained seems to prove the point.

[jimf671]

The training question seems to have visited all quarters since the beginning of this new venture. SAR partners are worried about getting enough training time with civilian aircraft even though over the decades of CivSAR provision they have never actually asked for as much training time as the contractor is ready to provide. Some military flyers go off on one about the contracted flying training time without proper consideration of the different crew responsibilities in different providers, the lack of a war-fighting requirements in CivSAR aircrew training, the standard of the facilities available, the contractor's position as a helicopter training provider, and the extended career pattern of CivSAR aircrew.


If you want something to criticise then get a letter off to your MP asking why the DfT and their predecessors took 40 years to come up with a competent SAR helicopter contract technical specification. Importantly, without such a contract specification, there was never any need for the CAA to regulate for the specialist environment in which only military SAR aircraft were operating. Nearly every mistaken assertion and real problem associated with this change derive from that same origin: past inadequacy of government contract specifications. When they eventually get it together, everybody is behind the curve. :ugh:


Exciting times ahead.


La oss gå flyr. :cool:

[mmitch]

As an innocent bystander ( but a taxpayer) who will inspect that the standard of the SAR units complies with the contract? Not (I hope) another Quango.
mmitch.

[jimf671]

As an innocent bystander ( but a taxpayer) who will inspect that the standard of the SAR units complies with the contract? Not (I hope) another Quango.
mmitch.


Frazer-Nash Consultancy - Frazer-Nash to assist in securing future UK Search And Rescue Helicopter Service (http://www.fnc.co.uk/news-events/news-archive/2012/frazer-nash-to-assist-in-securing-future-uk-search-and-rescue-helicopter-service.aspx)

[Fareastdriver]

Should the contractor not come up to standard they wil get blasted by four barrels from a gun turret.

[mmitch]

Thank you jimf671. Fareastdriver :)
mmitch.

[Thomas coupling]

Currently the MoD SAR units cover:
Search
Rescue
Mayday call outs
Medtransfers
Med rescues.

Will Bristow continue to do:
ON - SHORE med rescue / med transfer / maydays?

Or does their budget only cover offshore activities?

[jimf671]

In spite of Fareastdriver's proposal for taxpayers to get greater value out of BBMF's assets :E, that Frazer-Nash news page refers to "support the acceptance trials required to ensure that the service transitions smoothly from the current SAR Helicopter capability into the new arrangements" which corroborates what has been heard through other channels. Elsewhere on the Frazer-Nash site, another specific reference is made to this contract and "supporting government procurement through specialist expertise in helicopter performance, airworthiness and operations."

[jimf671]

Here is the link to the MAIN contract documents on Business Link.
https://online.contractsfinder.businesslink.gov.uk:443/Common/View%20Notice.aspx?site=1000&lang=en&noticeid=947360&fs=true

There is a 4Mb zip file called 'Final Contract (NRP10045UKSARCONTRACTREDACTED.zip'. Within that zip file there should be a PDF file called NRP10045UKSARHSch2.1SpecificationNOREDACTIONS.pdf that specifies capability for a range of land and maritime tasks.



In the GAP specifications, SAR Tasking is defined in the following way.
"Tasks will include but not be limited to:
Area search for Casualties.
Search for Casualties using Beacon search.
Deployment of rescue personnel/animals.
Deployment of rescue equipment.
Support to fire fighting at sea.
Recovery of Casualties.
Recovery of rescue personnel.
Recovery of rescue equipment.
Recovery of divers in distress.
Providing immediate emergency care.
Co-ordination of local SAR assets.
Inter-hospital transfer.
Aid to civil authorities.
Counter pollution."

[shetlander]

Currently the MoD SAR units cover:
Search
Rescue
Mayday call outs
Medtransfers
Med rescues.

Will Bristow continue to do:
ON - SHORE med rescue / med transfer / maydays?

Or does their budget only cover offshore activities?

They will cover maritime, aeronautical and inland emergencies.

[[email protected]]

It will be interesting to see how the med-transfers happen with such big gaps between the SAR flights - especially on the East coast.

Taking the Humberside cab on an ECMO to London means no SAR cover between Inverness and wherever the Manston flight relocates to. Once committed to the transfer it would be very tricky to retask.

Similarly if the Newquay aircraft does a similar transfer to London, there is nothing covering the SW approaches between St Athan and Lee on Solent.

Will the ARCC or Southampton MRCC (or whoever ends up controlling the aircraft) release an aircraft for such a transfer or will the sanctity of the UK SAR cover take precedence?

Suddenly a 10-flight solution doesn't look that clever.

[jimf671]

I can appreciate the point you make Crab. However, if the system can survive years of SK shaky rivets and single winches then perhaps things will continue to work fine.


As posted elsewhere in relation to the same point.

"The Bristow surge map shows how every part of the UK mainland is covered by between 4 and 7 helicopters (not including the spare at each base), except ... eh ... em ... the Ben Nevis area which is only covered by 3. :confused:

(Not expecting Sumburgh at Kintail any time soon.) :E

Let's not forget that the contractor is not tasking these aircraft. Also, that when availability all goes badly wrong, as happened during the Colwyn Bay incident in 2012, when Valley were off-line and Prestwick then broke a winch, a third base turned out to finish the job and it all ended well." :ok:


I suspect many will question the ARCC move to NMOC before the effectiveness of the 10-base solution. Surely it is at that 'big picture' level that such jobs turn from coal-dust to diamonds or vice versa.

[[email protected]]

Let's not forget that the contractor is not tasking these aircraft. Also, that when availability all goes badly wrong, as happened during the Colwyn Bay incident in 2012, when Valley were off-line and Prestwick then broke a winch, a third base turned out to finish the job and it all ended well. Except in that particular incident there were 3 bases, relatively close together, able to provide mutual support. When Lec came across to do the job the ARCC still had Wattisham and Boulmer to hold the East coast - not under the 10-base solution.

We come back to the fact that no matter how fast your aircraft, it can only be in one place at one time and, with the way the flights are spread, will leave massive gaps which a 'surge' capacity will take a long time to fill.

[jeepys]

Who's fault is it we have a ten base plan, not the contractor.
I appreciate there may be areas when the 'local' cab is in use leaving a large gap but unfortunately this is deemed an acceptable risk. This is not what the families of a victim wants to hear I appreciate but I also understand the economics behind the plan after all it would not prove financially viable to have a rescue helicopter every 30 miles for instance.

Remember the SAR(H) program allowed for 12 bases but that was 'supposedly' scuppered by Crabs ex colleague. It's a shame as this would have been better. Unlike an RAF officer (ex) to ruin the party!

[jimf671]

The 2001 Provision And Coverage Report, by a working group of the UK SAR Operator's Group, started with the following statement.

"The National Audit Office referred, in their February 1998 Report on HM Coastguard: Civil Maritime Search and Rescue (para 2.42), to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) strategic review of defence requirements, which was to include an examination of the provision of military search and rescue (SAR) services. It stated that the HMCG bases at Lee on Solent and Portland relied to some extent upon backup from military helicopters based at RNAS Culdrose and RAF Wattisham. The Report suggested that following that review “…it would be appropriate to assess the implications for HM Coastguard’s helicopter coverage, so that any rationalisation could be implemented when the contracts for the Solent and Portland helicopter bases come up for renewal …” "

So it was 17 years ago that somebody noticed at least some of the basic problems with previous contracts and it will probably be 2017 before the full solution is operational. Some of the reporting issues highlighted back then still haven't been fixed. :ugh: :ugh:

In 2006 an update was done for the MCA by Anatec UK Ltd.

Those reports are no longer on the net. I have copies of the 2001 report and the 2006 update if anyone is interested.


In 2011, the Assurance Review of Search and Rescue Helicopter Basing was done for the DfT by Atkins Defence. it is still on GOV.UK:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-search-and-rescue-helicopter-service [See 'UK Search and Rescue Helicopters Infrastructure']
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120606175016/http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/uk-sar-helicopters-services/assurance-review-sar.pdf
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120606175016/http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/uk-sar-helicopters-services/sar-infrastructure-selection.pdf



"Aircraft with still air speed of 120kts or less would fail to satisfy the surge key user requirement in a 10 base solution." :E

[jimf671]

... it would not prove financially viable to have a rescue helicopter every 30 miles for instance. ...

This, of course is where we have come from in the distant past. When this all started, if they needed a SAR helicopter across the other side of the country, somebody put it on a truck and drove it there.


(Plenty of stories of Whirlwind and predecessors not making it as far as 30 miles.)

[[email protected]]

Jeepys - I think it is generally accepted that the ex-crab who allegedly scuppered the first deal was something of a convenient scapegoat because the new Govt didn't want to be saddled with a £30Bn PFI it couldn't afford and the selected contractor was having trouble getting the required finance.

No, we don't need a SAR helicopter every 30 miles but there has to be a happy medium somewhere.

In coming to a 10-base solution, I think it was assumed that a 12-base solution had worked perfectly for many years which was far from the truth, even when we had a second standby aircraft at each military flight - unfortunately the data to prove a rescue didn't take place doesn't exist and won't in the future so we won't actually know if jobs aren't getting done because of the big gaps in the coverage unless there is a big, high-profile disaster where help is a long time coming because the super-fast new aircraft was already miles away in the wrong direction.

Now I am not saying that what we had before was a perfect solution because it wasn't BUT, if you are spending £Billions of public money on a SAR service for the next 10 years (and beyond) you would hope that some of these issues have been considered by the DfT.

There will be some surge capability as each flight will have 2 aircraft and Bristow have insisted that crews live within a 30 mile radius of the flight but how long that capability will take to ramp up has yet to be discussed as there seems to be no formal requirement for a second standby (which we used to have until a few years ago but lost due to poor serviceability).

[jimf671]

A couple of very good points there Crab.

COST
Costs in the previous contract process were like an uncontollable creeping fungus as the bean counters tried to guess what was going to happen across a 25 year contract period. I know that there was concern at the Treasury and I know that down through the DfT to the MCA and Coastguard, every civil service manager has received the message that this new contract process is a cost cutting exercise. :uhoh: That legacy has made it that little bit more difficult for those chasing a competent technical specification. :ugh:

Scapegoat? Certainly, one has to ask why moves that took place in early 2007 and mid-2008, and had been raised in a number of fora, took until December 2010 to emerge as a serious problem. :confused:

SPARE AIRCRAFT
Up until late 2012, spare aircraft in the bidders' proposed SAR fleets were something that typically amounted to one aircraft per type for training and one or maybe two aircraft per type for maintenance. That is why I felt comfortable posting here about those numbers at the time. Availability stats were available for aircraft of the same, or closely related, types in recent UK SAR service and the news was good. Reliability was good and servicing times were short. :ok:

Suddenly, sufficient aircraft of each type were required to equip all ten bases. If one type were grounded by the regulator, the service would continue. This happened in late 2012. :hmm: The spare aircraft will no doubt be routinely treated as though it were the local base spare but in truth it is a spare for the neighbouring base that uses the other aircraft type. Therefore, as you say, 'there seems to be no formal requirement for a second standby'.

Interestingly, we moved from a contract process where costs were spirally high above the original estimated range to one where, in spite of a new requirement for maybe 50% more aircraft than previously envisaged, costs came in 19.9% cheaper than the estimated range.

[shetlander]

Both 139's and 189's on regular training sorties.

S92 training ops currently being run from Humberside and Inverness.

[jimf671]

... and 189's on regular training sorties. ...

Thank you Shetlander. Very pretty.

Now tell us about the Performance and about the AFCS SAR modes.

[mmitch]

Bristow has given up on Manston and will go to Lydd, according to its MP.
BBC News - Manston loses search and rescue service (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-31542599)
Thanet council made little effort to get Manston reopened and then moans about loosing the SAR base...!
mmitch.

[sonas]

Shetlander good pics

[Same again]

Now tell us about the Performance and about the AFCS SAR modes.

If you need a copy of the RFM I will send you one.

[jimf671]

What the esteemed regulator thinks of what is in the RFM might be the interesting bit.

[P3 Bellows]

Well Jim...... I'm certain that the "esteemed regulator" as you call them, will be sure to call you up and ask your "esteemed" opinion on the AW189 autopilot as you are clearly an expert in this area ............ or are you just s##t stirring yet again?

[jimf671]

Yeah, OK. Sod the issues that are about to hold back deployment of the aircraft with the contracted capability. What the people who created the 300,000 views probably want is for us to go back to either a CivSAR vs MilSAR or a Fleet Air Arm vs RAF bun fight.

[Same again]

How long have you been flying the AW189 Jim?

[P3 Bellows]

Jim, you are indicating that the "esteemed" regulator is not happy with the AW189 autopilot so why don't you just enlighten us as to what exactly it is that they are unhappy about.

With your knowledge of the 189 autopilot you clearly know something so why not share rather than just hint/imply.

Or is just the case that you you know nothing about it.

[satsuma]

P3B and Same Again

You two seem to be in the know (and very proud of the fact) so while you're on your high horses, could you let us know what rules and regs Bristow will be working under for NVG flight? A lot of people are dying to know and with a little over a month before the first bases take over, I imagine you know them off by heart. Specifically, please tell us:

Cloudbase limitations (training and ops)
Visibility limitations (training and ops)
Minimum operating heights
Minimum separation criteria (or equivalent)
The obstacle plane values on which you'll base your heights
Safety rules if known obstructions are not seen by a certain distance
Where your obstruction data will come from and how often will it be updated
Any other regulations of note that may prevent you landing or approaching a winching area.

Thank you.

[satsuma]

Jim please note. Those are questions for someone else, not you.

[Same again]

That is on a need to know basis my little orange friend and apparently you don't need to know.

[satsuma]

What a pathetic non-answer. In other words, with a month to go, either you don't know or they don't exist. Welcome, people of Britain, to your new SAR service. Spin over substance, time and again.

[UCLogic]

There may of course be legal reasons why not such as ITAR restrictions. I am sure that even in Bristow there are people not allowed to have ITAR related information, and no I don't work for them but are familiar with the rules around such protected technologies

[satsuma]

The query is not about the technology itself but the way it will be used. Knowing the weather minima that crews will be permitted to work down to is hardly likely to be a state secret. Neither is the distance they have to remain from obstructions or the basis for their height calculations.

So come on, as P3B and Same Again have suddenly gone all shy, someone answer those very basic NVG ops questions please. Or alternatively admit that you are way way way behind the curve when it comes to NVG and it's highly questionable whether you'll be able to conduct night overland SAR Ops come April.

[HAL9000]

Satsuma,


It will be interesting to see if you get a proper response to your perfectly reasonable questions.

[[email protected]]

I also wonder what special dispensation they will have for operating IMC over the sea below Safety Alt - perhaps it will be glossed over with some guff about take off and landing rather than a documented exception to IFR.

[handysnaks]

Crab, it may well be covered in ORS4 no 1081.

[jimf671]

And not only 1081 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4No1081.pdf) but also 1070 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4No1070.pdf) recently.

[[email protected]]

Good answers :ok:

[satsuma]

it's highly questionable whether you'll be able to conduct night overland SAR Ops come April

Well I see no-one's denying it.

[jimf671]

Well I see no-one's denying it.


Well ...

Not quite. A few probing questions were recently put to Bristow and those questions and their answers are expected to appear online in an e-magazine shortly.

[satsuma]

Spin over substance.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Well I see no-one's denying it.


Maybe they have prioritised the work-up over replying to you...

[jimf671]

Heard that before somewhere.


The situation we are in is one where Bristow will have to carry the can for every shortcoming of their customer's contract writing and the regulator's lack of experience of some of the operating conditions as well as any mistakes they make themselves. The military's excellent PR and outstanding crew performances in spite of some rubbish kit and poor support give Bristow an even steeper hill to climb.

With a few week to go, they need to be out there telling everyone about all the good stuff they are doing. This is the world they are operating in. They must have known all this when they signed the contract.

[[email protected]]

They must have had a pretty shrewd idea what the training burden would be when they signed the contract as well but their training system is creaking badly.

[P3 Bellows]

With a few week to go, they need to be out there telling everyone about all the good stuff they are doing. This is the world they are operating in. They must have known all this when they signed the contract.

So let's see if I've got this right Jim. If Bristows were to come and visit you and tell you that everything is good in the world you would believe it and stop all your dripping and moaning in here?................really?

Frankly I'm sure they have better things to do than right now than pander to yours, crabs and the orange ones need in here. Get a grip.

I should point out for the benefit of the "orange one" and others who have a long line of technical questions that I don't work for Bristows and have no involvement with the SAR contract. I do however know quite a few of the Bristows pilots.

What I object to is armchair experts; some with a "little knowledge" who state for the benefit of all that it's going to be s##t without knowing a great deal about it.

And Jim; what you are saying is that the MOD PR machine was able to paper over the cracks of some truly shocking serviceability issues and Bristows should be using a PR system to the same effect..........really?

It's not PR that matters to the individual who finds themselves in difficulty and in need of rescue.

[[email protected]]

It's not PR that matters to the individual who finds themselves in difficulty and in need of rescue. Correct P3 and if you look carefully you will note that the concerns of most of us 'negative' posters are that those in need of rescue won't get helped because the training process isn't yet delivering crews able to do that everywhere - especially overland at night.

[Same again]

Please don't fret Crab. Those currently training with Bristow have actually flown helicopters before, have rescued people in distress before and will do so again in nice, shiny, new helicopters without too much trouble.

[jeepys]

So we can fill in some of the missing gaps of information can somebody please tell me when Bristows were awarded the UK SAR contract. Not a rough date but the exact date please.

Perhaps Crab, Tango, Jim or Vsf can help out here as they are as we know the experts and fonts of all knowledge.

[jimf671]

Please don't fret Crab. Those currently training with Bristow have actually flown helicopters before, have rescued people in distress before and will do so again in nice, shiny, new helicopters without too much trouble.

Correct.

The greatest thing about SAR Seakings are the four pink floppy components in the green onesies. :ok:

New colour of onesy, some gold bars, couple of thousand more shaft horsepower and the job's a goodun. :cool:

Then there's the .. em ... eh ... paperwork of course. :ugh:

[jimf671]

So we can fill in some of the missing gaps of information can somebody please tell me when Bristows were awarded the UK SAR contract. Not a rough date but the exact date please.

Perhaps Crab, Tango, Jim or Vsf can help out here as they are as we know the experts and fonts of all knowledge.


26th March 2013

The bidders had their phonecalls several days before that and some other elements lagged a bit. It was a couple of months before the redacted contract docs were in the public domain.

If you search for UK SAR Helicopter Service on businesslink you should find the contract docs and some stuff is still on the DfT bit of gov.uk.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the MOD PR machine was able to paper over the cracks of some truly shocking serviceability issues


From what I saw, the MOD never reported false serviceability/availability stats. Unlike another SAR service provider of recent years.

And on plenty of occasions (even in recent years when the 2nd Standby requirement had been dropped), the RAF SAR units have managed to get both their aircraft airborne simultaneously on SAROps.

[RUCAWO]

Being from the semi-detached part of the UK an a frequent traveller on the ferries, what happens when something like this happens again ?
Sealink-Holyhead (http://www.sealink-holyhead.net/#!antrim-princess/c1f2c)

[jimf671]

What happens?

You need fewer heroes because everyone has better kit.

[[email protected]]

Please don't fret Crab. Those currently training with Bristow have actually flown helicopters before, have rescued people in distress before and will do so again in nice, shiny, new helicopters without too much trouble. SOME of those training with Bristow have little or no SAR experience and some have very little NVG overland SAR experience, some have no NVG experience, SAR or otherwise.

Fortunately there are some with all the relevant skill sets and experience but it is not the case that all have by any means. The paucity of training hours as part of the contract means that much of the continuity training (read bringing up to the standard of those they replace) is expected to be done 'on the job' ie during SAROps. Anyone with any experience of SAR trg will tell you that is not quality training and in no way replaces proper structured training.

The new training system is so thorough that it is quite possible to complete it without actually winching at all!

[P3 Bellows]

The bidders had their phonecalls several days before that and some other elements lagged a bit. It was a couple of months before the redacted contract docs were in the public domain.

Jim ... You must be really well connected with the contact if you know all this. Do you work for the Government? Did you write the contract? What exactly is your involvement in the contract?

[Same again]

The new training system is so thorough that it is quite possible to complete it without actually winching at all!

Are you suggesting that winching should be part of SAR training?? I will pass that pearl of wisdom onto the training department.

[jimf671]

Jim ... You must be really well connected with the contact if you know all this. Do you work for the Government? Did you write the contract? What exactly is your involvement in the contract?



I am an engineer with experience of public procurement from both sides of the fence so I know where to go looking for the information.

[Same again]

Just spoken with the Bristow SAR training department Crab. They are extremely grateful and you will be pleased to know that I did not take the credit for your suggestion. I can't promise anything but there was talk of a Bristow Innovation Award. You are on the list of nominees - well done.

[jimf671]

SameAgain, if that's an indicator that a world-class standard of sarcasm is available within Bristow SAR then it is good news for their assimilation with local culture when operatiing out of Inverness. :ok:

[lowfat]

UK's new search and rescue helicopter service takes off at Humberside Airport | Grimsby Telegraph (http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/UK-s-new-search-rescue-helicopter-service-takes/story-26091055-detail/story.html)

[jimf671]

Recent training with Bristow Humberside is shown on the following website.

SAR helicopter awareness training with new Bristow Sikorsky S92A aircraft operating out of Humberside International Airport - Bolton Mountain Rescue Team (http://www.boltonmrt.org.uk/2015/02/04/sar-helicopter-awareness-training-new-bristow-sikorsky-s92a-aircraft-operating-humberside-international-airport/)

[[email protected]]

Mr Hayes said the new service will be “as good as” when it was run by the military.
Surely, with such a huge investment in 'state of the art' modern aircraft and superbly trained crews - it should be much, much better, not just 'as good as'!

Lucky they have the same 4 hours a day training allocation to hone those skill sets..................oh no, wait a minute.........................

[jimf671]

Surely, with such a huge investment in 'state of the art' modern aircraft and superbly trained crews - it should be much, much better, not just 'as good as'! .....


A good point Crab. However, I am concerned that it is a point that you then go on to over-play.

Until now the different providers have had different career paths and different crew structures including approaches to captaincy and command. Amongst bidders for this contract, there were also slightly different approaches in career path and command.

There will now be no three year tours, not everyone up front will have to be captain qualified, no commander up the back, and other differences. Although there will inevitably be a few who leave after a few years, we can expect most crew members to have a long career building up considerable experience in the way that you and others have done in SAR Force and the Fleet Air Arm.

I know that some on the bid teams looked at these factors during the bidding process. Perhaps one of them can step in and give us a thorough analysis.


The amount of training with MRT under the new regime has been questioned by teams across the country. However, the history is of teams not asking for enough from either military or civilian flights.


(Three months from now it will be a brave man who tells a certain about to be former Master Aircrew that he's doing a crap job just because he's wearing a different colour onesie and using a shed load of better kit.)

[P3 Bellows]

Mr Hayes said the new service will be “as good as” when it was run by the military.

Surely, with such a huge investment in 'state of the art' modern aircraft and superbly trained crews - it should be much, much better, not just 'as good as'!

Lucky they have the same 4 hours a day training allocation to hone those skill sets..................oh no, wait a minute.........................

So Crab. If you had not been seen as a social media loose cannon and had now been in the employ of Bristows (all that experience) what would you be doing differently from what you have done in the past. Just imagine yourself in the new role and tell us what you would be doing now because you wanted to be, and could have been, part of it.

So rather than seem a bit bitter and twisted; tell us how you would be conducting yourself had your application been accepted.

P3

[P6 Driver]

There seems to be a little bitchiness creeping into this thread.

Not good reading for those who are impartial.

[llamaman]

P6 Driver. Sadly it's a theme running through this (and many other) threads. Some really valuable and incisive comments are consistently undermined by pointless willy -waving and conflict of egos. I guess that's the downside of an open forum.

[[email protected]]

P3 - I suspect I would have been doing exactly what my ex-colleagues are doing - getting on with it and keeping my head down, hoping that someone in charge has a plan that will work.

Any shortcomings in training hours provision were put in place long before any of us were interviewed for positions and the training pipeline will have been dictated by cost in order to keep the bid lower than everyone else's.

The people involved in creating the bid may well have been qualified SAR guys but what experience did they have of being training providers of front-line SAR?

They had to sell their business case to 'big' Bristow and win the competition - training is an easy target when you are not a trainer - perhaps you can understand my opposition to the whole process because I have been a trainer for the last 30 years.

Loose cannon maybe - but what were they afraid of? Someone asking pertinent questions?

Again, not bitter or twisted - you and others seem determined that I should be - just disappointed that someone could be so petty and small-minded.

Jim - yes, in a few years time, there will be the requisite experience in role and on type - that is fine but the service has to be at the required standard from the word go, not building up to the required standard over 5 years.

[avturboy]

Simple question ... having visited Caernarfon today I see the building is complete, when do ops start there?

[jimf671]

Caernarfon (replaces Valley), 2 x Sikorsky S-92, 1 July 2015.

The chief pilot may be known to many of this parish.

[[email protected]]

the Japanese sniper returns;)

[jimf671]

Your career in the diplomatic service has been cancelled Crab. AGAIN.

[Clever Richard]

Those on this thread constantly berating the military way of doing things must be annoyed that the boss of the first civvy base is ex-RAF SAR. Just to rub it in, she might have been trained by Crab. Ouch!


Quick question, what is the Caernarfon chief pilot's background?

[jimf671]

As at Humberside, it will be someone with considerable experience of civilian SAR flying.

;-)

[[email protected]]

Ex-RAF SAR as well:ok: He left to work with Irish CG and now Bristow.

Clever Richard - which base are we talking about?

[Same again]

Can I suggest you read the posts again Clever Richard? The berating is mostly by Crab and his fellow cast members towards civilianised SAR and Bristow. Most of the crew members of Bristow UK SAR are ex-military so are not likely to berate their own backgrounds.

[[email protected]]

Hmmm - sounds like massberation to me;)

[Same again]

You should know ;-)

[[email protected]]

Hee hee, Fnarr, fnarr, a 12 year old's humour reaches PPrune - is it bottom jokes next? Or should I reply with a mature 'takes one to know one'?

[chopper2004]

Well this afternoon I watched and took these pics of the Sikorsky ceremony honoring the UK SAR venture and handover of 6th Helibus, with Sergei Sikorsky as part of the proceedings, I got a signed copy of his book..lovely chap,

Cheers

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0573_zpstkefpupo.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0674_zpstp5avshy.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0654_zpsyw1nyali.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0657_zps8qya6dvs.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0661_zpssvc55zzp.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0669_zpsou7zik3r.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_0672_zpsopkinlda.jpg

[Sevarg]

My she looks good. The cabin pic puts the seating lay out to bed as well. The only problem I see is the number of buttons for the winch wieght to play with:O

[Fareastdriver]

Call me an old dinasaur if you wish but I'm glad that I retired before I had to sit behind a panel like that. It hasn't got the magic of a real aeroplane.

[XA290]

Fareastdriver

Don't worry because as soon as you turn on the battery big round dials appear. Not a strip gauge in sight. It's like a glass cockpit but ....

Apparently Sikorsky did their market research in the Gulf of Mexico by asking a bunch of Vietnam veterans what they wanted on the display and the answer was "big round dials please" and that's what we got.

Not as clutter free as a 225 as a result sadly.

[shetlander]

Fareastdriver

Don't worry because as soon as you turn on the battery big round dials appear. Not a strip gauge in sight. It's like a glass cockpit but ....

Apparently Sikorsky did their market research in the Gulf of Mexico by asking a bunch of Vietnam veterans what they wanted on the display and the answer was "big round dials please" and that's what we got.

Not as clutter free as a 225 as a result sadly.

UK SAR S92 Cockpit

http://i57.tinypic.com/6oz7kw.jpg

[jimf671]

... It hasn't got the magic of a real aeroplane.


Call me an old softie if you wish but it has the magic of a real cab heater. :ok:

[Sevarg]

Jim, the S61's always did have a good heater the Seaking is an other story.

[TipCap]

When you could get the flaming thing to fire up!!

Failing that, it was feet on the heated windscreens (pre-goonsuit days) :ok:

[jimf671]

SHEPHARD's Rotorhub
Feb-Mar 2015

"AN EXAMPLE TO FOLLOW?
On a global level, the UK has probably gone furthest towards embracing the commercial SAR concept, with many other countries now looking closely at the mechanics of its contracts. In 2013, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) awarded a £1.6 billion ($2.44 billion) ten year SAR contract to Bristow Helicopters. It will commence in September 2015, with 22 aircraft – 11 AW189s and 11 S-92s – and conditions include 98% availability and response times set at 15 minutes during the day and 45 minutes at night. On 19 January, the UK Ministry of Defence went a step further towards eliminating military involvement in SAR, announcing the award of a ten year £180 million contract for rescue and support services in the Falkland Islands to Illinois-based AAR Airlift Group, working with British International Helicopters (BIH). Two AW189s will provide cover, with a pair of S-61s acting in support."

[satsuma]

The cabin pic puts the seating lay out to bed as well.

Hardly. The aircraft that are (forecast) to take over UK SAR at Humberside and Inverness in April will have completely different cabin layouts.

[SkyStalker]

Nice pics, but where do you put a casualty in a stretcher?
On the floor?

[[email protected]]

IIRC, the initial S-92s didn't have the range that had been promised so an internal fuel tank was introduced. I believe that is the same fit for UKSAR to give the required range and the stretcher lays on top of the fuel tank so they are at a better working height.

[Sevarg]

Sats, The cabin seating ref was to posts way in mid December:-
"Once you've had your dinner Shetlander could you explain why you can only seat 9 people in a big aircraft like the S92. And while you're there, please update the forum on how the S92 crews' NVG training is going and roughly how many NVG hours on type you expect those crews taking over on April 1st to have on that date. Thank you."
By Vie sans F. post 1354.

As for the 189 in my mind to much Westland content but then I'm not one of their greatest fans. I hope that I'm proved wrong but only time will tell.

[satsuma]

The fuel tank certainly takes up the space where a few seats will be, perhaps explaining the carrying capacity of just nine. However, I don't believe the stretcher can be stowed on top of the ferry tank - there's supposed to be some sort of strange contraption where you stow the stretcher but it's in a location that makes working around it challenging to say the least. Still, I'm sure they'll have sorted it by the end of this month.

[snakepit]

satsuma
The fuel tank certainly takes up the space where a few seats will be, perhaps explaining the carrying capacity of just nine. However, I don't believe the stretcher can be stowed on top of the ferry tank - there's supposed to be some sort of strange contraption where you stow the stretcher but it's in a location that makes working around it challenging to say the least. Still, I'm sure they'll have sorted it by the end of this month.

;) it is a tad disingenuous to keep bleating on about "no less a service" when it suits and then try to suggest that even the "strange contraption" proposed will somehow be worse than the current arrangement in the back of a sea king. My little orange friend, if they did absolutely nothing (ok a wet fit floor) to the cab pics above it would still be an improvement simply due to crash worthy seating and more space, though it has been a few years since I last saw the back of a HAR3 so I would be delighted for the SAR crews to be proved wrong ;-)

[satsuma]

Crashworthy seating it may be but considering the focus on emergency exit size (and indeed passenger size) in the North Sea in recent months following the Sumburgh ditching, you would think those cabin emergency exits would be more accessible. The backs of the seats quite clearly cover about half of the window. How can that be considered an improvement in safety?

[JerryG]

As the result of a book coming out next week (Rescue Pilot | Rescue Pilot Book by Jerry Grayson AFC (http://www.rescuepilot.net)) I have a number of national radio interview slots coming up, for which the recurring question is "Is it a good or a bad thing that SAR around the UK is being handed over from military to civilian auspices?".

My response so far has been that whilst old f*rts like me might react emotionally it's probably, on balance, not a bad thing. The national SAR system will be equipped with brand new hardware, primarily flown by guys who learned their trade in the military. We might not like it but it's a done-deal and it's now up to everybody to pull together to help make it work, hopefully better than before.

I don't have any great axe to grind on this subject, having effectively "retired" to Australia; a country that has made civilian/commercial/sponsored SAR work pretty well. But if anybody has succinct, adult and pertinent overview points that are still worth making nationally I would be happy to try weaving them into the media forums I've been offered.

I'm now off to don a tin helmet!

[satsuma]

Is advertising allowed on PPRuNe?

[JerryG]

Satsuma - My apologies if I'm crossing a line, it's not my intention, I'm just trying to explain the context of why anybody would ever want to ask my humble opinion on this subject on national radio.

[snakepit]

Crashworthy seating it may be but considering the focus on emergency exit size (and indeed passenger size) in the North Sea in recent months following the Sumburgh ditching, you would think those cabin emergency exits would be more accessible. The backs of the seats quite clearly cover about half of the window. How can that be considered an improvement in safety?

Hehe you are a card. So when comparing like for like doesn't work in your favour you campare like with just about anything else in the world that does, good one. :ok: I can just imagine the scorne that you and many others would rightly poor on the operator who designed a UK SAR aircraft built to O&G rules and regs. I'm still chuckling now at picturing row upon row of O&G compliant seating for fair paying passengers, just like in the back of a sea king of course :ok:

[[email protected]]

Jerry, I hope that in your book and in your media interviews, you highlight the fact that the SAR heroes are the rear-crew, not the pilots - we get to sit in a comfy and (generally) dry cockpit while they get smashed into decks, dunked in freezing water and left on dark mountainsides and have to deal with all manner of horrific injuries to the casualty.

How many years did you do in SAR?

[satsuma]

Snakepit

What are you babbling about? The basic function of an emergency exit is that it permits an adult human to escape without hindrance, whatever the aircraft's role. How do those seats meet that requirement?

[farsouth]

Come on Satsuma, you really do seem to be just picking for the sake of picking. How exactly do you plan to fill an aircraft with crashworthy seats, carry the maximum number of people physically possible, have every seat next to a full-size emergency exit, etc,etc.
The seats in that SAR fit are NOT blocking Emergency Exits - they are blocking escape windows, which is a different thing.

[Older and Wiser]

Since all seating configurations have to be approved by EASA I think it is safe to assume that the seating config in the S92 fully complies with all safety regs.

[satsuma]

Far South,

Can you or one of your colleagues post some photos of the inside of one of the soon to be operational aircraft at Humberside or Inverness then please, showing ALL the seats required to satisfy the contract and how no emergency exits are obstructed. While you're at it, take a picture of the strange stretcher stowage contraption so we can all have a laugh.

Try making the distinction between an escape window and an emergency exit to the gentleman trying to get out of it before he drowns and see how far you get.

Please remember, I wasn't the one who made extravagant claims about enhanced safety so I'm not just being picky for the sake of it, merely redressing the balance.

[Sanus]

Satsuma - all the side facing seats have single pull straps (yellow in the picture) that allows the seat to be totally removed within a second or so.

[satsuma]

Brilliant solution! Perhaps runs 7 & 8 in the HUET should have cabin occupants' exits impeded by a seat which they have to remove - while everyone else does the same with their seats. What could possibly go wrong? Run 8 can have a representative weight dummy strapped into the seat. Good luck writing that risk assessment.

No need for the photos Far South. You can see the seats in front of an emergency exit on the TV news footage on page 76 (post 1515).

EASA have signed this off, right? Who was doing the certification that day? Homer Simpson?

[TeeS]

Does EASA have anything to do with SAR aircraft Satsuma?

Cheers

TeeS

[satsuma]

Judging by the Airworthiness Directives they have released in the past relating to the SAR S92 and 139, I would say yes.

[Same again]

Oh Satsuma. If this is troubling you so very much and clearly causing you such incredible levels of stress and hysteria then why don't you simply travel to Humberside, introduce yourself (perhaps keep the Satsuma bit secret) and go see for yourself? You can ask questions and take photos to your hearts content.

I'm sure they'd be delighted to show you around and is anything really worth such high blood pressure. You might even get a nice cup of tea.

[satsuma]

Same again

It'll be troubling you and your organisation more if people drown in the back of one of your ditched aircraft because their attempt to exit is impeded by what appears to be a woeful design flaw. And it will trouble you even more if it was a known hazard and you did bugger all about it. Now, seeing as I'm still waiting for you to tell me what your NVG limitations are from a few pages back (admit it, you don't really know, do you?) your cavalier disregard for legitimate safety concerns is of no real surprise to me. Does it not strike you as odd that at a time when in the North Sea we are having to concern ourselves with passenger size, window size and window accessibility following the Sumburgh ditching and the difficulty the deceased appear to have had escaping, in SAR it's considered ok to partially block the exits with seat backs? Will it take a multiple drowning before you sit up and take notice? I hope for your sake you're not the one that'll be in the dock. Because someone will.

[Same again]

It would be no trouble at all to entertain you Satsuma. Although the crews maybe out training to prepare for important issues such as the start of contract. You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about many issues relating to the shiny new aircraft so please go along and ask yourself. You can play in the cockpit, run up and down the cabin and jump up and down in the hangar there as much as you like.

If you think that anyone actively involved in the contract is going to publish sections of the SAR Operations Manual here then you are very much mistaken. As I said before in relation to ANVIS, these details are protected and are on a need to know basis and you are clearly someone who does not need to know.

[Hompy]

Same again, looking at the photos from the U.S., Satsuma does have a point, though, doesn't he? No number of personal slights or put downs can really move those seat backs quickly, unfortunately. Maybe they will change position between there and here and you know that but are keeping it secret for some greater good?

I don't think anybody except those who need to know will be allowed anywhere near the aircraft in Humberside. Shouldn't they be under armed guard due IStarbinladen?

"Don't let the public near the thing, for goodness sake!! Yes they paid for it but they also pay my first pension and I don't let them anywhere near that phnaar phnaar"

Are tea making facilities up and running in Humberside? Good show.

[JerryG]

Hey Crab

Couldn't agree more. I've been striving to emphasise at every opportunity that there can be very few teams as tightly knit and as mutually respectful as a SAR crew.

Ref length (but you know what they say about length!) it was an all-too-brief 4 years from '76 to '80. Brief but intense ... probably the most satisfying job an aviator can do.

I'd be interested in your input to the question I was asked yesterday; What have been the most significant changes between then and now? Apart from the obvious civilian handover I named GPS and colour IR. Got any good additions to that?

[[email protected]]

Jerry, I think the changeover from the Wessex to the Sea King was a very big change in capability - then the introduction of NVG and finally the change to the winchman's job spec, turning him/her into a paramedic.

Will the new SAR service bring as big a change as any of those? Who knows but technology can always surprise you.

[as365n4]

The basic function of an emergency exit is that it permits an adult human to escape without hindrance, whatever the aircraft's role. How do those seats meet that requirement?

Apparently there are no obstructed Emergency Exits on these 92s!

The 92 has only 4! emergency exits which are the 4 windows at each corner of the cabin and they are clearly marked as such on the inside and outside of the helicopter!
Any other window is just for pax entertainment like on a Fixed Wing.

Some numbties are playing dumb on purpose on this thread?

[jimf671]

It's good to see Jerry and Crab taking a look at the changes that have occurred in the past. The history has a lot to offer us when trying to keep this change in realistic perspective.

[satsuma]

as365n4

I'll try and make this as simple as possible for you. I think that's what's required. Look at the footage of the Humberside aircraft in this link.

Mountain Rescue Team helicopter training | Border - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/border/update/2015-01-17/mountain-rescue-team-helicopter-training/)

Where the passengers are doing the brace position, you can see that the seats stretch all the way down to the ramp. In other words, they are in front of the rear starboard emergency exit.

If you look at the cabin photo a couple of pages ago, you will see that the seating configuration stops short of the emergency exit - yet what is clear is that the seat backs significantly obscure the escape windows. What is less clear is the emergency exit handle for the rear starboard exit (coloured red). You can see from its height above the floor that were a seat to be in front of that exit (as is the case with Humberside's aircraft and therefore, we must assume, all future UK Sar S92s), then access to the mechanism for opening the emergency exit is blocked by a seat - and perhaps by the chap sitting in it.

I can only count 8 passengers on the starboard side of that aircraft in the video which means they are probably seating two more (to meet the required 10) on the rearmost port seats behind the fuel tank - and thus also blocking the rear port exit and its activation handle. How can that meet with the safety regulator's approval? Escape windows being blocked is bad enough but I accept that they're not mandatory. Emergency exits (and their activation handles) being blocked is a different story and a big no no. So how has this slipped through the net?

[jimf671]

As we used to say in the world of technical authorship, 'If all else fails, read the instructions'.

DfT contract spec for Lot 1:
"minimum rescue capacity per Aircraft of 8 Casualties/Survivors (2 of which are capable of being stretchered)"

Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92, stated capacity:
"21 persons as required – 3 stretchers, 10 seated persons, additional standing persons"

Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92 illustrations:
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/S92-cabin-with-13-survivors.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/S92-SAR-Cabin-Configuration.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/S92-external-view.jpg

[Sanus]

Satsuma - you raise a point the airlines also struggle with. All airlines require the row of seats leading to the emergency exits to be clear of baggage, however should anyone seated in one of the (in economy) 3 seats be a large person who has become incapacitated then that emergency exit becomes blocked and unusable. We live in a world of compromise.

[satsuma]

Maybe so, but at least that obstruction isn't designed in by the manufacturers.

I don't fancy the chances of anyone escaping from an uncontrolled ditching if they're in the rear half of that cabin. You can't expect multiple passengers to be simultaneously removing seats from their housing to facilitate their escape. That would be hard enough if it was warm, dry, the right way up and well lit. But it won't be, it'll be the opposite. They really need to address this with a seat re-design before tragedy strikes.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

You can't expect multiple passengers to be simultaneously removing seats from their housing to facilitate their escape. That would be hard enough if it was warm, dry, the right way up and well lit. But it won't be, it'll be the opposite. They really need to address this with a seat re-design before tragedy strikes.


But how often are there going to be multiple passengers over the sea? As with the Sea King, the S-92s will spend most of their time with 4 crew on board and 1, maybe 2, casualties. And those casualties are rarely in a fit state to escape a ditching, however good the emergency exits are. The most common time that a SAR helicopter is full of pax (or should I say, non-aircrew folk) is when deploying MRT, which doesn't tend to happen over the water. Of course there are very occasional rig evacuations/whole ship's crew pick-ups, but these are the exception, not the norm - in stark contrast to the oil and gas aircraft. Does this mean that emergency exits being obstructed is ideal? Not at all, but let's not pretend this is a daily risk for the future SAR crews and their passengers.

[jimf671]

Very good point TOTD.

[Never Fretter]

Compare an RAF Sea King with non-crashworthy seating

http://www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/1280b20b4ae9886d44acb54fead7cebcdc1d49bd.jpg

to an (admittedly partially fitted out CHC) S-92 with crashworthy seats push out windows behind each seat etc

http://img8.custompublish.com/getfile.php/428204.958.uwcctvtryy/800x0/1-6%20S-92A%20CHC%20MCA%20Cabin_1_highres:_4288x2848.jpg?return=www. acg.no

[[email protected]]

However, the S92 is lacking the f'ing big door that the Sea King has halfway along the pax compartment - even fat boys can get through that one;)

[handysnaks]

Seems to be a f'ing big door at the back that a Sea King didn't have......

[[email protected]]

Ah but how long does it take to open/jettison?

[tonkaplonka]

As long as it takes to turn a handle!:ugh:

[The SAR RC]

An EASA approved emergency exit needs to be simple, obvious, unobstructed, not require exceptional effort to open and to have conspicuous markings for use in the daylight and dark. It is doubtful therefore that the S92 ramp upper door would fall into this category whereas the Sea King cabin door window might (were it in need of EASA approval). The main S92 ramp certainly cannot be considered an emergency exit due to its mode of operation.

[snakepit]

So to summarise the last few humorous posts the Sea king is betterer (yes I did spell better like a 6 year old would in an argument) because it has a big door in the middle near all the seats (not that you can actually sit on the seats due to the role equipment). The S92 is not as good because it's big ramp door is not an emergency exit (nor is the sea kings but let's not let facts get in the way). Priceless discussion going on here 😜

[Same again]

Most of them have probably never seen an S-92.

[jimf671]

Well, just for them ...

tonnt9zZExg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tonnt9zZExg&feature=player_detailpage

[Fareastdriver]

One thing that surprised me about that video was them tossing the winchman out at anout 100 ft.. I can appreciate the downwash being to strong to hover at 20ft or so but we had the same problem with the Puma. What we did was to approach at the normal low winching height, toss out the winchman and we would climb as the W/O kept him at the same height over the sea. We would then arrive at about 80 ft or so. After the pickup we would pull them up 20 ft. and descend as the W/O winched them in. I believe that a similar procedure was use for a cliff rescue.

It's all to guard against a cable breaking with somebody on it. I thought for a moment that with a dual winch you had a main and backup cable but it didn't look as if there was more than one. I can only assume that there is an awful lot of trust in the winch cable.

Not that I should worry too much, I'm not in the game anymore.

[Norfolk Inchance]

That is the SOP; I guess it just appears that they are higher than they actually are. 40' is standard height for deploying the winchman.

[Norfolk Inchance]

...or the Rad Alt is playing up

[Fareastdriver]

I was comparing the height above the sea with the rotor diameter of 56 ft. It looked nearly two rotor diameters clear.

[Norfolk Inchance]

I can see your PoV however, I would be very surprised if it were >40'. They are pretty anal about it, sometimes it can be a bit frustrating. Operationally it is different; if the winchman needs to go out at 3500', then so be it. Like most things nowadays, we are all becoming too risk averse.

[Norfolk Inchance]

With regards to the dual hoist; on the S92 you have an inboard and outboard hoist. On the AW139 (not sure about 189) you have a fore and aft mounted hoist. The are identical hoists, but are not /cannot be operated simultaneously. If one hoist were to fail (not cable snap) with, for instance 250' of cable out, the winchop attaches the serviceable hoist to the u/s cable via a karabina, and winches out delivering the 'S' hook to the winchman, who then connects himself to the new hook, unhooks from the other and is recovered to the a/c. The other cable is then either jettisoned or recover by hand to the a/c.
This is basic HHCO, hook hoist changeover, and would be carried out if after considering whether it would be prudent to return the winch man on a fixed cable to the deck or cliff etc, where they have just come from.
Hope I'm not teaching you to suck eggs - no offence intended.

[Fareastdriver]

I can understand that; similar to long-lining.

[jimf671]

This afternoon, an army of journos, a few mountain rescuers and a Coastguard flash mob gathered at the new Bristow hangar at Dalcross (INV) for the Bristow Inverness launch event.

http://hmcoastguard.********.co.uk/2015/03/inverness-search-and-rescue-helicopter.html [LINK FAILS!! Pprune filters out the word b10gsp0t, so add it in manually with o instead of 0!]

STV news item (http://news.stv.tv/highlands-islands/314224-ceremony-to-mark-new-civilian-search-and-rescue-from-bristow/)
(Glenelg and Kintail MRTs working hard in the background to spoil some of the shots. Sorry Sam ;) )

I spent three hours there. For some of those present, it may have been a case of 'ooh look at the new toy'. However, like other NW MR folks, I think I may have seen an Sikorsky S-92 somewhere before, so I attended to other matters.

I spent most of that time talking to Inverness SAR pilots and pilots who form part of the management team at Bristow SAR. My main concern was the regulatory framework. In 2012, my conversations with the CAA led me to believe that there was commitment within government and CAA to delivering a regulatory framework for life-saving flight that was workable for UK SAR in a service equivalent to previous providers. Today, I wanted to know whether the CAA has delivered the goods on those SAR flying rules. After conversations with several highly experienced flyers, I believe that the answer is that they have delivered. :ok:

I also spoke to people about previous civilian SAR contracts, about NVG, and about the AW189, incuding AFCS SAR modes, icing protection systems and NVG.

36 pilots and 42 rear crew are moving to Bristow on Managed Transition. (So statistical estimate of 70 to 80 spot on.) :ok:

Bristow Inverness will operate with a really impressive proportion of former RAF Lossiemouth SAR aircrew both through Managed Transition and other routes. These guys know about mountains. Same faces, same service? Not quite. Several of them seem to be smiling a lot more now that they have seen the kit they will be working with. :ok: Less abandoning broken helicopters on mountains :uhoh:, less fire-fighting :eek:, less online gaming (due to aircraft offline!). So same faces, smiling more, four or five thousand shaft horsepower and the lots of super 21st century role equipment. Unlike a Sea King SAR hangar, the most sophisticated piece of equipment in the Bristow SAR hangar is NOT the entertainment system in the crew room. :cool:


The DfT and MCA are already thinking about how they will run the competition to replace this contract is 2023/26. Joined-up thinking and long-term planning in British public procurement: today's scoop! Remember where you heard it first folks. :E

[jeepys]

So Jim,

are you saying that actually this could work out to be a good service? Surely not.

[jimf671]

It remains the case that I believe that this contract has a competent specification and has been won by a competent contractor.

It also remains the case that like William Thomson, I believe that when you can measure something and speak about it in numbers then you know something about it. Therefore most commentators in the public domain know nothing about this subject.

It also remains the case that I believe it is right to get stuck in and ask searching questions to establish the facts rather than believe the spin.

********************************


Sometimes the facts get overshadowed in a good way. Yesterday, as one pilot spoke of the recent developments in the regulatory framework, the glint in his eye was one such event. :ok:


'Per Ardua Ad Astra'

[Oldlae]

When Bristow held the SAR contract the Air Equipement hoist in the S61N had a cable with a 600 lb max working load, but the breaking load was 3000 lbs, I guess that the more modern hoists have similar cables. Having said that, the cables were susceptible to snatch loads, they couldn't be used to tow a car for instance if it was lashed up to do so.

[edwardspannerhands]

JimF671 - I think the personnel from the Coastguard Rescue Service may object to being labelled a "flash mob". It is my understanding that those personnel present where from coastal areas right across what will be the AOR for the Inverness Cabs. Maybe you didn't notice, but there was also representatives from the RNLI at the event also. Its not just MR who will work with these new machines!!:ugh:

[satsuma]

Everyone enjoys a bit of irony first thing in the morning. I've got to hand it to you Jim, this one's priceless.

I spent most of that time talking to Inverness SAR pilots and pilots who form part of the management team at Bristow SAR............I believe that the answer is that they have delivered.

I also spoke to people about previous civilian SAR contracts, about NVG, and about the AW189, incuding AFCS SAR modes, icing protection systems and NVG.

And then this.

rather than believe the spin

Surely you must see, that's exactly what you're doing, believing the spin and then re-broadcasting it here.

From the above quote it looks like you asked about NVG twice. By all accounts, that's twice more than they've flown with them! But I'm sure it'll all be ok because, "Inverness SAR pilots and pilots who form part of the management team at Bristow SAR" say it will be.

[212man]

...as one pilot spoke of the recent developments in the regulatory framework

No doubt assisted by the fact that the Bristow SAR Director is the ex-CAA SAR 'gatekeeper'.

[Norfolk Inchance]

It is interesting to note the favourable comments and attitude to the new aircraft, coming from the MR community. The lads and lasses who will operate the equipment will deliver a first rate service, that is in no doubt. However the presence of the 92 is slightly misleading, as it will be replaced with a much smaller 189 in due course. This will cause MR personnel some problems, having to shuffle around on their backsides, unable to stand, smaller teams etc etc. Two of the UK's three main 'mountain job' bases equipped with 189's. Interesting.
I expect Stornoway to be heading SE a lot more, particularly when the W/V is up a bit.

[satsuma]

The lads and lasses who will operate the equipment will deliver a first rate service, that is in no doubt.

Why is this in no doubt? Some of the entry requirements (in terms of SAR experience) were really quite paltry.

People really need to stop making sweeping statements that are impossible to substantiate.

[dingo9]

What were the mil SAR requirements for aircrew just out of interest?

[satsuma]

A multi-stage selection and intensive training process that takes place over a number of years.

[dingo9]

So ab-initio pilots with les than 200 hrs TT would never get sent SAR then.

[satsuma]

There are hours, then there are quality hours. In the military when sorties are failed the student doesn't have the ability to throw money at the problem until it goes away. I can't speak for every pilot that has gone through the military training system but in general, no. Do remember, there's a four man crew on SAR and the experience (or lack of experience) of the rearcrew is equally vital.

[jimf671]

Ed, the flash mob comment indicates a good turnout from the Coastguard and is more of a dig at MR colleagues whose turnout, apart from Glenelg, was not very impressive.

[Sumpor Stylee]

Was the Chief Pilot position filled by proper procedure of fair competition using SVN?:E

[jimf671]

Satsuma, inadequate previous civSAR contracts have resulted in years of guarded answers from contractor personnel that in turn have taken their toll on relations between some MR and civSAR. We are moving into a new era with a proper tech spec and reformed regulatory framework. There is also more clarity about where GAP SAR North stands during the next two years while still under the old regime.



With you on the rear crew. Yesterday I spoke up for rear crew status and will follow that up. Bristow have some influence there but really the DfT and the CAA need to get in there and specify and regulate this area in a more intelligent way.

[jimf671]

No doubt assisted by the fact that the Bristow SAR Director is the ex-CAA SAR 'gatekeeper'.

And I had a chat with that chap as well about how easily the gate will swing open if the correct evidenced forces are applied.

[jimf671]

UKC Photos - Bristow personnel. Bristow SAR Inverness. (http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.html?id=255114)

[P3 Bellows]

Sumpor,

Was the Chief Pilot position filled by proper procedure of fair competition using SVN?

That is an odd question to ask in here but entirely appropriate for someone of your age. Mental is it?

P3

[snakepit]

Was it just me or did Satsuma make a sweeping statement that he was immediately unable to substantiate lol

[satsuma]

It was just you.

[Same again]

No it wasn't.

[Adam Nams]

https://heavywhalley.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/202-squadron-d-flight-party-cancelled/

If this is true, and I have no reason to doubt that it is not, then someone should be hanging their head in shame

[Oldsarbouy]

If you turn up at the planned venue I'm sure you won't be alone!

[Adam Nams]

I would have loved to have been there, but distance precludes. However, I will raise a glass to my first SAR flight and all who have served with such dedication, past and present, from near and far. Have a great time and best of luck for the future, whatever it holds

[jimf671]

If you turn up at the planned venue I'm sure you won't be alone!


Indeed.


And who knows what tomorrow will bring.

[snaggletooth]

My first SAR tour too; the most challenging and enjoyable of my entire RAF career. It was a privilege to work at D Flt and is where I learnt my continued and utmost respect for those brave and selfless souls in the 'Knapsack and Bovril Brigade' - MRTs, civilian and military, throughout the UK. :ok:

The end of an era... Onwards and upwards... Hope you all still have a good send off despite what the Fun Police have dictated.

From a dyed-in-the-wool Yellow-hatted war-dodging bed-wetting SAR-buoy. :D

[P3 Bellows]

If true. All very sad.

How can you order someone not to go to the pub with a few mates and ex colleagues for a beer. F&@££&g ridiculous if you ask me.

A sad reflection on the times we live in.

P3

[jimf671]

... How can you order someone not to go to the pub with a few mates and ex colleagues for a beer. ... ...


Two scenarios occur to me.

1. Media and communications have over-stepped the mark and been far too sensitive about celebration of SAR Force's part in provision of the service across the decades, underestimating the backlash and the resulting reputational damage.

2. D Flight and several former colleagues are flying that evening. D Flight providing an extension to SAR helicopter service and their former colleagues trying to get their NVG hours up on the S-92.

A combination of both is possible.



It feels strange to be hoping it is Scenario 1.