UKSAR2G - MCA CivSAR Second Generation [Archive]

jimf671

29th Jan 2021, 17:41

It looks like this month is the right time for a new thread where we can debate :8 and rumour :E about UK helicopter SAR and occasionally marvel at the durability and longevity of the RAF vs RN posh-hovering bitch-fest. :ugh:

The UKSAR2G contract process was due to kick off this week but the nominated date has come and gone without comment. :confused: Whatever happens, they need to get it moving in the next few weeks.

An engagement phase has been progressing since last spring involving interested parties in the industry and SAR stakeholders including police, MRT, lifeboats, ambulance, fire and others. That phase has included several online meetings with Q&A sessions (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-rescue-aviation-programme-uksar2g) and consultation on draught copies of key documents. :ok:

At an early stage in 2012 there emerged a technical requirement matrix that was largely inherited from SARH25. The approach this time moves towards 'effect-based requirements'. Qinetiq's Post Implementation Report in 2019 proposed the development of 'Measures of Effectiveness' and such measures are now set against each 'User Requirement' in the form of a Threshold value and an Objective value

The latest versions of the Lot descriptions appear in the recent Prior Information Notice (https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/001168-2021) and you may find those enlightening.

Here are the published dates for the contract process based on documents on the UKSAR2G webpage (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-rescue-aviation-programme-uksar2g) and the Prior Information Notice published last Wednesday.Publication of Procurement Notice 25 Jan 2021
Publication of Selection Questionnaire & Memorandum Of Information 25 Jan 2021
Deadline for Submitting Clarification Question on MOI & SQ 1 Mar 2021
Deadline for responses to MOI &SQ 8 Mar 2021
SQ Evaluation & Shortlisting & Assurance 19 Apr 2021
Notification of Decision to Candidates 26 Apr 2021
Issue of ITT to Participants 4 May 2021
Deadline for Submission of Initial Tenders 9 July 2021
Evaluation … Shortlisting for Participation in Negotiation 20 Sep 2021
Negotiations 21 September to 29 November 2021
Issue of Invitation To Submit Final Tender (ITSFT) 29 Nov 2021
Deadline for Submission of Final Tenders 15 Jan 2022
Evaluation of Final Tenders 18 Feb 2022
Government Internal and Assurance Process 18 Feb 2022 to 4 Jul 2022
Award Decisions 5 Jul 2022
Standstill Letters Issued 5 Jul 2022
Contract(s) Completed With Supplier(s) 26 Jul 2022 :cool:
Contract extensions have recently been awarded for both rotary and fixed wing existing contracts. The mobilisation phase is now scheduled to run until 30th September 2024. (Originally, the current rotary contract had been due to start transitioning out in 2023.) The entire contract is due to be established in service by 31st December 2026. As I understand it, the latest date that any part of the current rotary contract can be extended to is 31st March 2028.

[email protected]

2nd Feb 2021, 06:04

Could be a short thread Jim:)

Take the Bristow model and do it cheaper - contract won:ok:

jimf671

2nd Feb 2021, 09:23

That might be a struggle. Let's remember that last time, the Contract Notice estimate was £2bn to £3.1bn. Then the competive dialogue cut it down to the 'Usual Suspects', B + B + C. Then, when price was examined, CHC (an incumbent!) was rejected because they were more than 20% higher than the cheapest bid. Then Bristow were awarded at 20% below the Contract Notice estimate for a contract that had probably become more expensive as the process had evolved.

How many companies really really want SAR? Is being short of oil crew change work really enough to turn you into a SAR-God?

Is a Parent Company Guarantee worth the paper it's written on?

The MCA seems currently obsessed with the mountain of data pointing at short, quick rescue jobs involving only one or two rescued persons. I don't think that scenario is a surprise to anyone on here. So that results in the new Lot 1 spec and people start asking themselves if they need a big expensive AW189 for these little jobs and can they do this with an AW139, Dauphin, 145, secondhand Alouette? Once they are deeper into this, that may not seem so simple though.

Another aspect of possibly using a more diverse fleet for a diverse range of sizes of job is that the right aircraft will rarely be in the right place at the right time. The stats show that Inverness have been most of the way to Denmark and most of the way to Rockall in their 189s which I think is an indicator that these things do not always turn out as you expect.

So, as it currently stands, this is not same-old-same-old and there are lots of new ideas splashing around. It is going to be interesting to see what emerges once all the new ideas are thrashed out during months of interaction between the MCA and the bidders. Could still end up as same-old-same-old with the usual suspects in the frame by this time next year. Who knows?!

[email protected]

2nd Feb 2021, 16:58

Variable Load

2nd Feb 2021, 22:08

I've lost interest already.

jimf671

3rd Feb 2021, 02:25

Lies, damn lies and statistics Jim - the stats said we needed faster helicopters with fewer bases the last time and now they are saying we need short range, rapid response which must equate to more bases..

It does seem a bit nuts to me. If you put a SAR helicopter base somewhere, I think its likely that the nature of things will tend to produce lots of short range small quick jobs. And if you go back far enough, they were all jobs like that when helicopters could barely go 30 miles without breaking down.

My hope is that during the summer when they have to sit down to talk about this with people who have put the hours in, they will be introduced to the practical realities.

We currently have one of the best services in the world. There is ambition in several quarters to make it even better. Not all of the ambitious ideas will work. And in the background is a government that is not known for its competency.

Oops, oh look, the Contract Notice is delayed over a week already when it gets handed upstairs to the Government of the day. Surprise!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyjVZ_6MLjY

[email protected]

3rd Feb 2021, 11:07

The simple fact that the money-tree is bare after Covid and Brexit means that any ambitious plans will be sidelined by financial scrutiny and the need to look competent but at a reduced cost.

jimf671

3rd Feb 2021, 18:26

They are basing their cost evaluation on every life saved being worth £2M. That is a figure arrived at independently by myself for Kintail MRT and stated by MCA Aviation recently in relation to this contract process. (Some involved in the last contract process say that £4M was being used previously, so maybe brexit has devalued British life by 50%?) On the basis of the £2M, any likely charging outcome is good value. And worth remembering that we have just been through a 10 month demonstration of how people ARE the economy and with every life lost a little part of the economy dies. Whether those in the present Government are capable of absorbing that lesson does remain to be seen.

jimf671

15th Feb 2021, 10:47

MCA Aviation have issued another Industry Update, dated Friday and posted on the USAR2G web page this morning.
Youtube location: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhEv03sAOQ&

This update is presented by Damien Oliver, Commercial and Programmes Director, senior responsible owner for the UKSAR2G programme. The core message is as follows.

"We would dearly love to have by now been able to launch the selection questionnaire for UKSAR2G. We still have one or two questions that we need to address that are posed to us by others elsewhere and we're busily doing that right now. Please again rest assured that this is not a sign of change or things to worry about; simply the nature of a complex programme like UKSAR2G in this kind of situation that we're in right now.

We expect to be able to launch the tender earliest we suspect the beginning of March so we are very grateful for your patience while we work through what we're dealing with at the moment."

jimf671

15th Feb 2021, 10:54

I've lost interest already.

Don't wander off yet. I was thinking of running a comedy competition on the basis of what changes to the Selection Questionnaire are being proposed by the current UK cabinet.

What are the chances that one of them has a mate who has a PPL(H) and reckons he could cover Lot 1 at weekends, with his Robbie, except during the flat season. :E

[email protected]

15th Feb 2021, 12:12

And they'll put Dido Harding in charge:):)

cyclic

15th Feb 2021, 18:19

simply the nature of a complex programme like UKSAR2G

If you add the cost of this amazingly complex tender process to that of the contract, I reckon Crab could be back in light blue doing it cheaper with a few N3s - short range and certainly innovative.

jimf671

16th Feb 2021, 12:34

Yellow 365?

OO! Now you're scaring me. :eek:

[email protected]

17th Feb 2021, 07:27

It was always a myth that civSAR was going to be cheaper than Mil - it has worked well, primarily due to brand new aircraft and well trained crews but has it been cheaper? And will it be cheaper in the future?

I'm not defending for an instant the p*ss-poor procurement processes of MoD that allowed milSAR to get to such a parlous state with aircraft availability btw.

jimf671

9th Mar 2021, 12:41

Last night, the MCA published the Contract Notice for a new aviation contract on gov.uk.
https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/004655-2021?origin=SearchResults&p=1

The Notice doesn't tell us much. The is no estimated value stated. The contract period is 144 months with options for 24 month extension.

The runners and riders will now be accessing the selection questionnaire and the race is on.

Meanwhile, we await the equivalent notice for the Irish coastguard helicopter contract that has been delayed several months and has been due to follow a very similar timeline.

Medevac999

9th Mar 2021, 14:19

The Dutch CG contract must be announced soon?

jimf671

9th Mar 2021, 14:52

EESDL

9th Mar 2021, 17:49

I see what y-oo did there - maybe missed by s-oome ;-)

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 12:05

This will upset the apple cart! I am delighted to see a new player in the mix. BHL will need to work hard to retain this contract, although everything I hear is that they are doing a good job. Draaken are a serious outfit and with the might of Airbus on their side, they must be serious contenders.

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 14:57

Draken/Airbus press release to Heli.com showing H145 and H175 specs...

jimf671

16th Mar 2021, 15:47

Sitting on the door sill as we hover next to a cliff at 3500' in a howling gale I want to be in a AW189K or a S-92B.

Just saying.

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 16:17

Sitting on the door sill as we hover next to a cliff at 3500' in a howling gale I want to be in a AW189K or a S-92B.

Just saying.

But your budget manager would much prefer you to be in a 145...after you have explained why all of those operators in the Alps have got it wrong...at 10,000ft...

Just sayin’ 😉

jimf671

16th Mar 2021, 17:42

It's not to say that there is nothing to learn from the Alpine experience but so many things are different. Distances, population densities, weather conditions. The economics are not what they first appear. A friend of mine in Austria turned up at a job where there were 11 helicopters. The same job here would be attended by one or two helicopters. To replicate the alpine situation, we'd have a 145 in Inverness, Fort William, Lossiemouth, Plockton, Wick, ... and so on: definitely no budget for that!

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 18:15

All valid points but of course the Alpine service operates in a fundamentally different way - a new UK model would be custom built. At ‘List’ price you can purchase somewhere between 3 and 5 H145 for the price of an S92, and they cost a fraction of the price to operate.

It has a range of just under 400 miles at 140 kts and plenty of power and control authority. I would take it over a ‘92 in the hills any day. Now pair that with H175 for long range work (remember the UK is tiny). Even with having to open a few more locations, the savings over the contract life are enormous. Then add Airbus’s drone/UAV knowledge for Search and maritime patrol etc...🤔

I suspect BHL will have one hell of a fight to keep this contract with the corporate resources of Draken and Airbus ranged against them...

but never say never.

hargreaves99

16th Mar 2021, 18:38

This is all a wasted exercise. It's pretty obvious that Bristow are going to retain the UK SAR contract. UK Gov has no currently appetite for change/risk, and Bristow are so broke that they will probably run the contract with tiny margins, just to retain it. All the staff/infrastructure/procedures/bases/know-how etc is already in place.

Milo C

16th Mar 2021, 18:55

Airbus tried the same a decade ago in Spain with Maritime SAR. It turned into an absolute failure.
it's still weird, that an OEM, in order to sell helicopters, becomes the operator itself.

Medevac999

16th Mar 2021, 19:14

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 20:11

sounds like you work for Draken.

Or Airbus...don’t forget them!

Anyone remember DHFS? FBH/Cobham ran it very successfully and everyone thought they were a dead cert. for the MFTS contract.

Until Airbus stole it from under their noses.

Anyone who thinks BHL are going to win because they run it now is deluded. Airbus’ BD team, lawyers and political movers will have done their due diligence in this. They partner with Draken who have just bought Cobham and gained a SAR school...

Coincidence? I doubt it- this plan has been cooking for a while. Airbus believe they can win.

And I do not work for Airbus, Draken or Bristow.

jimf671

16th Mar 2021, 21:01

Baldeep Inminj

16th Mar 2021, 21:19

Historically, the UK government has let about 20 contracts for helicopter SAR and 4 of those have been won by companies NOT called Bristow.

Why might that pattern continue?

Bristow know and understand the associated landscape pretty well.

At a time when O&G is in turmoil and trying to work out how to operate without a stupid amount of cash splashing around, having a government cheque coming in every month is really nice. This has worked well for Bristow during a difficult period and they need it to continue.

Era have been doing SAR and the merger has not in any way diluted the Bristow approach to SAR. The reverse perhaps. Bristow internal organisation appears to have been re-arranged for the purpose of taking over the world of SAR.

I agree with everything you say, without reservation. As I said earlier, my understanding is that the current contract is working well and providing an excellent service (with all of the fully trained SAR crews that Bristow inherited from the RAF/RN).

Bristow promised to set up a SAR school to train new crews, but has not done it. Draken already have one. They know the landscape, as you put it.

Airbus will make sure the aircraft costs are rock-bottom. The wider Bristow group are fighting bankruptcy....

I will watch this with interest, but my money is not on Bristow.

jimf671

17th Mar 2021, 01:14

There's probably about 190 operational aircrew plus some standards folks. I know 78 of those came across through managed transition and a few other military were already Bristow/CHC or whatever and a few dozen civilian background. Stornoway was supposed to be the S-92 training base with the spare aircraft and Inverness for AW189 with sims at Dyce. The Inverness thing never worked out because of the 189 delay and it looked like Lee-on-Solent took that role. I know they have been recruiting ab-initio rear crew but I don't know where they have been doing the training.

Some management musical chairs and retirements are already starting to eat into the numbers. However, a few SAR-experienced crew have continued to leave the military and find their way into Bristow SAR.

Three years from now,
SCENARIO ONE - LIMITED CHANGE
Bristow or CHC or A N Other get Lots 1 & 2 and continue to use S-92 and AW189 in the ten base solution.
Everybody TUPE over and job done.
SCENARIO TWO - RADICAL
Two different new contractors get Lots 1 & 2 with an accountant's wet dream using H175 and H160 at 14 bases.
Oh dear. Where are all these SAR aircrew coming from? Where are suitably qualified transition crew coming from?

[email protected]

17th Mar 2021, 07:25

Everybody TUPE over and job done. that same TUPE that was summarily ignored when the military crews moved to Bristow?

Oh dear. Where are all these SAR aircrew coming from? Where are suitably qualified transition crew coming from?
The same place as last time, the incumbent service provided most of both.

lowfat

17th Mar 2021, 08:59

LOL 145.. can you remember all the bitching and moaning about the aw 189 god it'll be unbearable on here if airbus get a foot in the door.

Baldeep Inminj

17th Mar 2021, 12:09

Jimf671

Where will the crews come from? Really?

If Bristow lose the contract, do you seriously not believe that their SAR crews will be banging at the door of the winning bidder - honestly?

If company ‘X’ win (where ‘X’ is not Bristow), then finding crews will be the least of their problems as the current crews will pile across, TUPE or not.

jimf671

17th Mar 2021, 13:29

I have pointed out what I expect might be the minimum and maximum mobilisation training load. I have considered what was happening in 2013-19 and I think that's fair.

rotor-rooter

17th Mar 2021, 16:19

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/airbus-and-draken-europe-team-for-uk-search-and-rescue-bid/142922.article
Airbus Helicopters has only one long-range rotorcraft in its line-up: the H225 heavy-twin. However the Super Puma’s reputation in the UK has never fully recovered from the effects of a fatal crash caused by a gearbox failure in 2016.

While the company declines to say whether or not it will propose the type, it adds: “The issues, such as they were, have been extensively addressed and explained to the whole community.”

“The issues, such as they were, have been extensively addressed and explained to the whole community.” I must have missed this explanation, can anyone enlighten me? I was aware that the failure mode had been determined, but have never seen it published anywhere.

hargreaves99

17th Mar 2021, 17:02

Airbus won't get UK SAR, their reputation has been trashed by the 225 debacle and their poor response to it.

The AW139/AW169 has triumphed over Airbus/Eurocopter

Baldeep Inminj

17th Mar 2021, 18:26

Airbus won't get UK SAR, their reputation has been trashed by the 225 debacle and their poor response to it.

The AW139/AW169 has triumphed over Airbus/Eurocopter

A very good point. They certainly have some work to regain confidence but any bid from them simply cannot include the 225, that would kill them.

jimf671

17th Mar 2021, 19:31

The H225 is optimised for long crew change flights over the sea. The published 800m HOGE figure doesn't make me optimistic about its suitability for a LandSAR-dominated deployment in rocky western and northern corners of the kingdom.

Maybe someone with H225 experience can enlighten us regarding real-world mountain performance?

[email protected]

17th Mar 2021, 19:58

Baldeep Inminj

17th Mar 2021, 21:19

I suspect you will need to analyse the statistics to see just how often that very long range capability was needed since 2015 - perhaps you don't need so many big helos and could concentrate the smaller ones with better hover performance where they are needed.

As I said above in not so many words- spot on Crab. H145 and 175 for example...reliable, cost-effective and available.

The UK is not exactly awash with surplus cash and the cheapest bid that meets the requirement will win (obviously). Draken and Airbus will take some beating as Leonardo products cost more to buy and more to fly, and as for the S92....

jimf671

17th Mar 2021, 21:38

I suspect you will need to analyse the statistics to see just how often that very long range capability was needed since 2015 - perhaps you don't need so many big helos and could concentrate the smaller ones with better hover performance where they are needed.

There has of course been a bit of that going on already. That's why there are two AW189 bases (and previously two AW139 bases) on the south coast near large numbers of coastal and near-coastal jobs and three S-92 bases in the northern and western extremities adjacent to large expanses of ocean within our SRR. However, the more diverse the nature of the fleet is made to address the different needs the more often the right aircraft will not be in the right place at the right time.

Baldeep Inminj

17th Mar 2021, 22:56

There has of course been a bit of that going on already. That's why there are two AW189 bases (and previously two AW139 bases) on the south coast near large numbers of coastal and near-coastal jobs and three S-92 bases in the northern and western extremities adjacent to large expanses of ocean within our SRR. However, the more diverse the nature of the fleet is made to address the different needs the more often the right aircraft will not be in the right place at the right time.

Completely correct and this is the dilemma- do you put S92’s everywhere ‘just in case’. No, of course not - too expensive. So for the rare long-range job that a 145 could not manage... use a 175. It might not be able to be there immediately for sure, but where do you draw the line? You cannot have an S92 positioned every 10nm around the coast...there must be a compromise and I can assure you that cost will win the day. If I can save millions (realistic figures) by having a couple or 3 of 175 bases and accepting that on occasion a rescue will take longer, then I will take that every day of the week.
We cannot afford 500 offshore helicopter platforms, positioned all around the UK, each with 2 S92’s... which would be a great solution. We equally cannot have 1 base with an R22 - somewhere between the two is the compromise.

We have to buy what we can afford. Draken/Airbus will crucify Bristow on price.

Apate

17th Mar 2021, 23:17

Well if Baldeep is there making the case for 145s and 175s, rest assured that Draken are doomed IMHO :}

jimf671

18th Mar 2021, 07:42

Sécurité Civile have 23 bases and are supplemented by the Gendarmie fleet. It's the sort of organisation you have if your SRR is not much bigger than your land area and you have quite a number of major SAR hotspots. I am not detecting an appetite at the MCA for 23+ bases. There is also a much greater emphasis on patient treatment in UK SAR than in some other territories.

As for the cheapest bid, well Draken and Airbus, like others, will not get an opportunity to be the cheapest bid at final tender if they do not demonstrate in the earlier stages that they have a technically more than adequate, and preferably innovatively progressive, solution. The MCA are not laying this out on a plate this time. Nobody knows going in exactly what boxes they have to tick. There is probably a lot of making your own boxes. Anyone who has picked too many accountants and MBAs for their bid team instead of lineys and posh hoverers with imagination and ambitious SAR ethos may not perform well in the environment that I expect the new process to create.

[email protected]

18th Mar 2021, 11:29

It's still going to come down to money though - the country is broke and Trillions in debt - the solution can be as innovative as you like but in the current and short-term climate, it will have cost as a major factor.

hargreaves99

18th Mar 2021, 12:17

jimf671

18th Mar 2021, 12:28

It's still going to come down to money though - the country is broke and Trillions in debt - ... ... ...

Well, actually, NO. The Government owes money to the Bank of England, which is effectively just another government department. So not really debt. Can't go broke. In a high value, monetarily sovereign, developed economy, austerity and poverty are political decisions and they appear to continue to exist for spite.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deficit-Myth-Modern-Monetary-Economy/dp/1529352525/

https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-deficit-myth/stephanie-kelton/9781529352528 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deficit-Myth-Modern-Monetary-Economy/dp/1529352525/)

Also, the MCA is using the idea that each accidental death costs the state a sum of around £2M as part of the arithmetic for this contract and this is in the public domain. That means that each year of operations of this current service is paying for the entire ten years of the contract including both fixed and variable costs. I am reliably informed that a number like that was also being used in the previous contract process. A few years ago, I was asked about the cost of helicopter rescue and arrived at the same figure independently using what I had found out from organisations like the Health and Safety Executive, Network Rail and the Crown Office who all propose similar numbers.

Every budget holder in the civil service loves to go to his boss and tell him that he got it so much cheaper, and I am sure Damien Oliver is no different in that respect, but the reality is that pouring money into a well equipped and well staffed highly capable search and rescue aviation service is a wonderful way of injecting money into the economy at a time when stimulus is desperately needed.

Baldeep Inminj

18th Mar 2021, 13:25

it doesn't help that "Draken" is an awful name that sounds like a Bond Villain. Who on earth comes up with these names? The name hardly resonates safety, reliability and dependability etc does it?

I know it's just a name, but these things do affect how people view your "brand"

Interesting point...but Draken is Swedish for Dragon - which is pretty cool, and at least they are not named after a fat darts player😉.

[email protected]

18th Mar 2021, 13:39

pouring money into a well equipped and well staffed highly capable search and rescue aviation service is a wonderful way of injecting money into the economy Or of propping up an otherwise struggling company - as we are doing at the moment:E

jimf671

18th Mar 2021, 14:16

Or of propping up an otherwise struggling company - as we are doing at the moment:E

They are ALL struggling companies at the moment unless they are Amazon or fake PPE companies owned by the pals of government ministers.

And keeping your people alive is never going to be a bad thing to do.

lowfat

18th Mar 2021, 16:19

Baldeep Inminj

18th Mar 2021, 17:10

I wonder what the Payload for a 145 would be in Sar Fit?
2 hoists ,Flir turret, search light , Floats, Life rafts and a wet floor. suppose your only looking at 1 causality statistically. Hems plus basically.

The new 5 blade H145 (no rotor head so maintenance is negligible) has a MTOW of 3800 kg. In full SAR fit with full fuel, she can carry 6 people.

lowfat

18th Mar 2021, 19:09

The new 5 blade H145 (no rotor head so maintenance is negligible) has a MTOW of 3800 kg. In full SAR fit with full fuel, she can carry 6 people.

So that is 2 pilots 2rear crew and 2casualties? I am sceptical because I have had to deal with eurocopter statistics in the past. Optimistic doesn't come close.

Baldeep Inminj

18th Mar 2021, 19:14

So that is 2 pilots 2rear crew and 2casualties? I am sceptical because I have had to deal with eurocopter statistics in the past. Optimistic doesn't come close.

I suppose it depends how you choose to operate - no requirement for 2 pilots in my book, as other SAR operators operate single pilot without issue, but I am the first to say that single-pilot NVD is not a great idea.

[email protected]

18th Mar 2021, 20:42

Single-pilot SAR? Excellent, we are back to the Wessex days:ok:

helicrazi

18th Mar 2021, 21:10

Single-pilot SAR? Excellent, we are back to the Wessex days:ok:

May aswell dual purpose the hems aircraft whilst we are at it. Just stick a winch on, easy as that :sad:

rotor-rooter

18th Mar 2021, 21:31

The past SAR performance section in their submission should make interesting, albeit brief, reading.

jimf671

19th Mar 2021, 13:30

I wonder what the Payload for a 145 would be in Sar Fit?
2 hoists ,Flir turret, search light , Floats, Life rafts and a wet floor. suppose your only looking at 1 causality statistically. Hems plus basically.

I know of one operator with 135 that has them in three different equipment configurations: hoist, cargo and EOS. That'll sort of work if you are operating in a small area but across a larger area you are soon going to find that the right aircraft is not in the right place at the right time.

jimf671

19th Mar 2021, 13:34

In the light of news of the shifting industry landscape in recent days, there is an interesting question added to the industry Q&A record on the MCA site.

"7.1. If we name a subcontractor in the SQ, are we obligated to use them?" :E

3D CAM

19th Mar 2021, 16:39

Single-pilot SAR? Excellent, we are back to the Wessex days:ok:
Better than that, get rid of one of the rear crew and get a sproule net and you are back to Dragonfly days...but saving loads of dosh:hmm:
My three pennnies worth, as an interested outsider now.
3D

[email protected]

19th Mar 2021, 22:53

Man it all with well meaning amateurs in R22s and we could have a Dad's Army SAR Force:)

rrekn

3rd Jun 2021, 10:15

Rumor has it that the short list is out... Who got in?

Medevac999

4th Jun 2021, 06:17

Rumor has it that the short list is out... Who got in?
Interesting any link?

Franks Town

4th Jun 2021, 17:53

Bristow
CHC
and ?? Maybe Draken Airbus or Heli Ops with a bigger backer.

EESDL

6th Jun 2021, 09:56

Just been told on the 'QT', by a bloke in the pub (socially distanced) that a new company formed by Wiking Helicopters and BelAir have won it. The decision was based on their extensive knowledge of the sector and reputation for delivering on time.......................................

rrekn

6th Jun 2021, 10:13

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/220x215/tenor_5652ed1190ab50b8478e935136be0b3d683b5383.gif

jimf671

6th Jun 2021, 14:09

Based on the plan for notification and the period of the delay at the start of the year, notification of the selection decision to candidates might be tomorrow(-ish).

No updates on the webpage.

rrekn

10th Jun 2021, 07:24

Official word is out...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-rescue-aviation-programme-uksar2g/uksar2g-june-update

Who is Serco?

Bravo73

10th Jun 2021, 09:07

Who is Serco?

https://www.serco.com

A cynic might claim that they are a company designed to siphon off public funds via government contracts.

BTW, EEA Helicopters Operations B.V. = CHC

Medevac999

10th Jun 2021, 09:24

https://www.serco.com

A cynic might claim that they are a company designed to siphon off public funds via government contracts.

BTW, EEA Helicopters Operations B.V. = CHC

So is SERCO going a lone or partnered? Is AIRBUS with Draken?

Bravo73

10th Jun 2021, 09:36

So is SERCO going a lone or partnered?

I can only imagine that they have got an aviation partner, at least. But there aren't any press releases or likewise elsewhere on the internet. Maybe this is where Babcock comes in?

Is AIRBUS with Draken?

Yep. Draken were previous Cobham Aviation Services.

jimf671

10th Jun 2021, 11:00

Official word is out...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-rescue-aviation-programme-uksar2g/uksar2g-june-update

Who is Serco?

In spite of vast temptation for cynicism it should be recognised that Serco have been doing rotary aviation stuff since they were created out of RCA Service Division UK in the late 80s.

EESDL

14th Jun 2021, 19:26

Rumour has it it is BIH with their ready-made UK SAR AOC

Aurora Australis

14th Jun 2021, 21:43

Rumour has it it is BIH with their ready-made UK SAR AOC

If so, I hope whoever is making the decisions on awarding contracts looks closely at the levels of service/reliability that they currently achieve on their one SAR contract!

jimf671

15th Jun 2021, 09:12

Rumour has it it is BIH with their ready-made UK SAR AOC

Top of my very short suspect list.

Medevac999

16th Jun 2021, 07:17

If so, I hope whoever is making the decisions on awarding contracts looks closely at the levels of service/reliability that they currently achieve on their one SAR contract!

They seem to have a high turnover of personnel

Aurora Australis

16th Jun 2021, 07:43

They seem to have a high turnover of personnel

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.

Medevac999

16th Jun 2021, 09:05

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.

Obviously this is a rumour network but if the posts are true then good luck to SERCO!

rrekn

16th Jun 2021, 09:57

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.

To be fair to BIH, who wants to keep heading to the Falklands....

Baldeep Inminj

16th Jun 2021, 18:25

I think this will quite quickly boil down to straight fight between BIH and Draken/Airbus. Airbus have a huge amount of innovation and 'novelty' that they can bring to the table, and Draken have a proven pedigree of delievering SAR training (as Cobham and now as Draken). However BIH have been providing a solid SAR service with a good rep (as far as I know). I think any bid involving Airbus will be difficult to beat on sheer price alone, but reputation counts for a lot and BIH have provided the service very well, which has to count for a lot (one would hope!).

My money is on Draken personally as I have a good idea (having worked with them several times) how Airbus think - they will have done their homework on this one. In any event, it will be a great watch...popcorn at the ready.

Ant T

17th Jun 2021, 11:34

To be fair to BIH, who wants to keep heading to the Falklands....The Falklands is not necessarily the problem. I know of many pilots and engineers who have enjoyed their time in the Falklands, both in the distant past (Bristow MOD contract 1983-1998), and Bristow oil contract 2015 - both of which I worked on. And I know of a good number of them now who would jump at the chance to come back here.

However, having also worked there in the past for BIH, over a total of 5 years, I can certainly say that the turnover of staff there was markedly higher than any of the other three organisations that I have flown for in my career. And I know of more than three local aircraft engineers, as well as base management staff, and at least one pilot (me), living in the Falklands, who chose to leave what on the face of it was an ideal job. (At the time I resigned, I did not have another job to go to).

It was the unhappiest workforce I have ever been part of.
However BIH have been providing a solid SAR service with a good rep (as far as I know). I think any bid involving Airbus will be difficult to beat on sheer price alone, but reputation counts for a lot and BIH have provided the service very well, which has to count for a lot (one would hope!)
That was not my experience. The dedication of the pilots, rear crew and engineers is without question, but the SAR aircraft spend what seems to me an astonishing amount of time unserviceable.

rogue leader

17th Jun 2021, 14:11

Seems some possible confusion here:

BIH = British International Helicopters - Falklands SAR
BHL = Bristow Helicopters Limited - UK SAR

212man

17th Jun 2021, 14:22

Seems some possible confusion here:

BIH = British International Helicopters - Falklands SAR
BHL = Bristow Helicopters Limited - UK SAR

I don't think there is confusion - surely the Falkland contract is operated on their UK AOC, and the suggestion was that BIH will partner with SERCO?

rogue leader

17th Jun 2021, 14:45

212man

17th Jun 2021, 15:01

Well looks like BHL are out of the race then!

"I think this will quite quickly boil down to straight fight between BIH and Draken/Airbus"
"BIH have been providing a solid SAR service with a good rep (as far as I know)"
Actually, re-reading the posts, maybe Balldeep is confused, but the initial comments about SERCO teaming with BIH seem reasonable. Bristow teamed up with SERCO once before for the DHFS contract, but separated (that's why it went from FBS to FBH). Not sure if the parting was amicable or not though.

finalchecksplease

17th Jun 2021, 21:17

rogue leader

17th Jun 2021, 22:17

What do you base that on, they are shortlisted for lot 1,2 & 4 (see link above) so still in it, not?

Baldeep's prediction above. I just tried to point out possibly he got BIH confused with BHL, but maybe he just has inside knowledge 👍

Medevac999

25th Jun 2021, 12:50

Loads of them.

European Search and Rescue (SAR) Competition Bonanza: Northern Norway SAR, Netherlands SARHC, Ireland SAR Aviation and UK's UKSAR2G - Aerossurance (http://aerossurance.com/helicopters/european-sar-competitions/)

i think someone mentioned that Bristow had picked up the Dutch SAR contract. I never saw a press release

Franks Town

25th Jun 2021, 17:51

Rumour is Bristow won it but it’s being disputed. Didn’t hear who’s put in the complaint .

Medevac999

26th Jun 2021, 09:13

Rumour is Bristow won it but it’s being disputed. Didn’t hear who’s put in the complaint .

what reason could it be disputed?

detgnome

26th Jun 2021, 09:18

I think it's standard practice to dispute the contract award. It will probably reveal additional information about the bid - it's a form of intelligence gathering.

jimf671

26th Jun 2021, 19:26

Airbus Helicopters UK LTD
Only bidding for the whole thing (Lot 4). Do we take from this that such a big outfit is only interested in a contract of sufficient size to extract a decent amount of profit? Are we going to have to deal with a Super Puma public backlash? This time, is this more about recovering a battered reputation? Draken expected to provide some solid SAR skills.

Bristow Helicopters Ltd
The incumbent has won all but four of the twenty-odd UK SAR contracts and are providing a good service. They know how to do this. They have emerged from rough times and merged with ERA. Apparently undiminished in their SAR ambition. I wouldn't bet against them.

EEA Helicopters Operations B.V.
Parent of CHC who are a former UK SAR contractor. Also been down a rocky road and come out the other end. Current Irish Coastguard SAR incumbent. They know how to do this. Referred to the CMA over their purchase of part of Babcock's helicopter operation.

Serco Limited
One-time electronics company turned general government contractor perhaps in a similar vein to Babcock. Always had some aviation involvement, including aircraft maintenance and airfield support services for the RAF. Expected helicopter partner unconfirmed.

I know you'll all help me out if I got any of that wrong. :rolleyes:

Milo C

15th Jul 2021, 11:24

https://helihub.com/2021/07/15/serco-withdraw-from-uk-sar-2g-contest/?fbclid=IwAR0LkKglUsvtFpAtlHt-suo_4yxcSwtj8bOIoAJpKSFHNpD1OzOssnfYJms

Jimmy does SAR

25th Aug 2021, 11:03

Has anyone with SAR knowledge ever seen a recent UK HMCG’s operational organisation chart, showing JRCC, NMOC, MRCCs etc, and how the organisation dovetails together?

Baldeep Inminj

1st Sep 2021, 14:53

I hear that the Draken Academy at Newquay has just gone under. I wonder how this will affect the Draken/Airbus bid for UKSAR2G?...I am sure it won't help as it will hurt their reputation if nothing else. One of their selling points was the fact that they had a school where they could train new candidates and 'feed' the SAR contract from the bottom up. Sad news for the guys in Cornwall.

Medevac999

1st Sep 2021, 17:04

TUPE

1st Sep 2021, 17:50

chopper2004

2nd Sep 2021, 14:28

Draken Europe has announced plans to close its UK-based Helicopter Academy at the end of this year (https://www.key.aero/article/draken-close-uk-based-helicopter-training-academy?utm_content=178383464&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&hss_channel=fbp-105708449507555)

So is that the end of the Airbus bid? Or will someone else partner with Airbus Helicopters for this?

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

cheers

FloaterNorthWest

2nd Sep 2021, 15:45

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

Why do you need a S92 airframe?

There are other aircraft which meet the requirements of Lot 2.

TUPE

2nd Sep 2021, 17:24

So is that the end of the Airbus bid? Or will someone else partner with Airbus Helicopters for this?

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

cheers
S92 won’t feature. Too expensive.

black.beard

3rd Sep 2021, 09:19

Why do you need a S92 airframe?

There are other aircraft which meet the requirements of Lot 2.

What other aircraft are there which meet the requirements? the H175 is the same as the AW189. I agree that the S92 is expensive to buy and operate but those initial purchase costs are mitigated over time. It also has a well proven operational history and the BHL frames were all new
In my view a contributing factor as to why BHL won the UKSAR bid was to use the AW189 in the bid since A) it was a brand new frame; and B) it would be built in the UK at the Yeovil plant creating new jobs for AW and thus making the decision to award to a US company more politically palatable.
As for BHL not meeting the serviceable aircraft req's - thats a new one on me. Another consideration in the SAR2G contract award, is that BHL either own all or parts of some of the airports they operate from at the current locations; BHL lost the island SAR contract to CHC many years ago so learnt that lesson and have subsequently 'insulated' themselves from some of the risks this time around. I think BHL will take some beating, they provide a good service and are the current incumbent.

I mean 2XL?? come on the only reason they in there is due to the oil dispersal role with their ancient B727; their P31 Navajos are better placed in a museum, they'll be cheap for a reason

black.beard

3rd Sep 2021, 21:49

ya can either have "good" but it won't be "cheap". Or "cheap" but it won't be "good".

As regards the 'more capable' argument I'm not aware of another current frame which can land a Mountain Rescue team up in the Cairngorms in sh1te weather, with all their kit to rescue casualties and bring them back safely as they have been doing - does anyone else know?

Aurora Australis

4th Sep 2021, 10:07

…..As for BHL not meeting the serviceable aircraft req's - thats a new one on me. ……

Not sure which post you are referring to, but if it was mine above

“If so, I hope whoever is making the decisions on awarding contracts looks closely at the levels of service/reliability that they currently achieve on their one SAR contract!”

and

”Quote:

Originally Posted by Medevac999

viewpost.gif (https://www.pprune.org/showthread.php?p=11062805#post11062805)

They seem to have a high turnover of personnel

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.”

then I was referring to BIH, British International Helicopters, and their SAR contract in the Falklands, not to BHL, Bristow Helicopters.

black.beard

8th Sep 2021, 21:44

Thank you, I think there was a little message crossing and/or confusion as regards the use of BIH and BHL to represent the 2 different operators. Too many TLAs.

I absolutely agree BIH have both a high turn-over of critical personnel (Crews & LAEs) and their 'S' record will raise eyebrows.

BHL (in my opinion) have - low staff turn-over and good frame 'S' record and a correspondingly good record at saving peoples lives ; but they will be relatively expensive

chcoffshore

9th Sep 2021, 13:11

Aurora Australis

9th Sep 2021, 14:47

BHL (in my opinion) have - low staff turn-over and good frame 'S' record and a correspondingly good record at saving peoples lives ; but they will be relatively expensive

Absolutely agree with that comment - but I think it’s a case of “you get what you pay for”, as the MOD in the Falklands have discovered!

Baldeep Inminj

9th Sep 2021, 17:21

So are Draken still in the game?

Thats a really good question. AFAIK, the Newquay Academy and the SAR2G bid are complete separate things - one is not dependant on the other. As I understand it, the closure of the Academy is simply down to fact that paying customers are not coming through the door. This has nothing to do with whether Draken can support a bid for SAR2G as I see it as HMCG is already the customer. Airbus/Draken could easily put the provision of training services into their bid and outsource this if required - I do not see why the closure should have an impact on their ability to bid.

That said, there is no doubt that it looks bad. Draken only purchased and rebranded the Academy recently from Cobham and have already closed it. Did they do their due diligence? I don't know, but I have to say that on the face of it, it does not inspire confidence. I think the real question is not whether Draken are still part of the bid, but whether Airbus still want them to be.

chcoffshore

10th Sep 2021, 06:44

Thats a really good question. AFAIK, the Newquay Academy and the SAR2G bid are complete separate things - one is not dependant on the other. As I understand it, the closure of the Academy is simply down to fact that paying customers are not coming through the door. This has nothing to do with whether Draken can support a bid for SAR2G as I see it as HMCG is already the customer. Airbus/Draken could easily put the provision of training services into their bid and outsource this if required - I do not see why the closure should have an impact on their ability to bid.

That said, there is no doubt that it looks bad. Draken only purchased and rebranded the Academy recently from Cobham and have already closed it. Did they do their due diligence? I don't know, but I have to say that on the face of it, it does not inspire confidence. I think the real question is not whether Draken are still part of the bid, but whether Airbus still want them to be.

Yes it will be interesting to see which direction Airbus go in, also apart from the academy their Middle East contract also went down the pan. If you don't have one then obviously you don't need the other............

Baldeep Inminj

11th Sep 2021, 11:39

A usually reliable source tells me Draken will no longer be part of a bid for UKSAR2G. Unclear if Airbus will look for a new partner.

This is a RUMOUR and NOT confirmed, but he’s in a position to know.

chcoffshore

13th Sep 2021, 05:55

Medevac999

23rd Sep 2021, 06:48

jimf671

23rd Sep 2021, 14:08

My estimate of the programme timeline expects "Deadline for Submission of Initial Tenders" about now and the "Shortlisting for Participation in Negotiation" about 6 to 8 weeks hence. So I expect this is a period when there is an opportunity for the great ego that is Airbus to disappear from the process without fanfare and with minimum embarrassment.

On the helicopter side of things, we would then be left with 'the usual suspects', unless one of them does something strange in which case it would all be over.

helihub

24th Sep 2021, 08:01

It was indeed just a rumour. The Airbus/Draken teaming is still very much alive in UKSAR2G after checking with the right people :ok:

jimf671

24th Sep 2021, 12:33

In that case it becomes more interesting to observe whether, with 3 bidders still in the game for the helicopter lots, there will be a down-seletion in November-ish. Invitation to Submit Final Tender will only go to those that MCA Aviation judge can do a proper job.

Baldeep Inminj

27th Sep 2021, 11:52

It was indeed just a rumour. The Airbus/Draken teaming is still very much alive in UKSAR2G after checking with the right people :ok:

This is great news - healthy competition is rarely a bad thing!

_SpinFlight_

8th Oct 2021, 08:35

Rumour has it that Airbus Helicopters will be no-bidding UKSAR2G citing "commercial reasons" following the supposed break up in early September with Draken Europe.

Medevac999

9th Oct 2021, 05:59

Rumour has it that Airbus Helicopters will be no-bidding UKSAR2G citing "commercial reasons" following the supposed break up in early September with Draken Europe.

yes there is a official confirmation on Twitter of all places

SimonK

9th Oct 2021, 07:16

yes there is a official confirmation on Twitter of all places

I’m not disagreeing with you by the way, but a quick look through Airbus tweets over last week and I couldn’t find anything. Have you got the link?

rrekn

9th Oct 2021, 11:18

https://twitter.com/RAeSTimR/status/1446540328887017474

TUPE

11th Oct 2021, 17:26

Airbus Helicopters pulls out of UK SAR2G contest 11-Oct-2021 (https://helihub.com/2021/10/11/airbus-helicopters-pulls-out-of-uk-sar2g-contest/)

SimonK

11th Oct 2021, 20:57

Thanks for posting the link guys - interesting development indeed. Wonder why they pulled out in the end?

[email protected]

12th Oct 2021, 06:44

I think I could make a good guess........

Medevac999

12th Oct 2021, 07:20

Thanks for posting the link guys - interesting development indeed. Wonder why they pulled out in the end?

and where does this leave Drakens helicopter business?

SimonK

12th Oct 2021, 07:36

I think I could make a good guess........

Well it is a rumour network after all Crab - go for it ;)

[email protected]

12th Oct 2021, 09:33

Simon K - if you knew who I worked for - well until the end of the year anyway - you would probably guess where I would point the finger................

SimonK

12th Oct 2021, 09:41

Simon K - if you knew who I worked for - well until the end of the year anyway - you would probably guess where I would point the finger................

I have no idea who you work for Crab...not to worry was just curious anyway. I'm sure it will all come out in the wash soon enough.

[email protected]

12th Oct 2021, 12:59

SimonK

12th Oct 2021, 13:09

Well if you are in partnership with a company who has a spineless leadership team and can't manage important contracts properly - including being very disingenuous with the customers - wouldn't you pull the pin if you had an international reputation to protect?

Ok I get the picture, cheers :)

Baldeep Inminj

12th Oct 2021, 14:04

Medevac999

12th Oct 2021, 14:32

detgnome

12th Oct 2021, 18:44

_SpinFlight_

13th Oct 2021, 09:26

Medevac999

29th Oct 2021, 15:55

lowfat

30th Oct 2021, 10:01

What ? the Dutch Antilles and Cyprus?

black.beard

30th Oct 2021, 17:19

Draken have just informed staff that they are pulling the pin on all their helicopter contracts

wow - glad I did nt get the job with them now (they have operations in W Mids as well)

Baldeep Inminj

31st Oct 2021, 12:40

wow - glad I did nt get the job with them now (they have operations in W Mids as well)

You dodged a bullet there. When Cobham bought FB Heliservices they kept the same incompetent management- this was a fatal mistake. Draken bought a business that was terminally ill, run by bullies and arrogant narcissists.

I feel for the guys losing their jobs, but they will hopefully find some comfort in the fact that anyone else will be better to work for.

[email protected]

1st Nov 2021, 12:26

Where is the 'Like' button?

Ant T

1st Nov 2021, 12:47

You dodged a bullet there. When Cobham bought FB Heliservices they kept the same incompetent management- this was a fatal mistake. Draken bought a business that was terminally ill, run by bullies and arrogant narcissists.

I feel for the guys losing their jobs, but they will hopefully find some comfort in the fact that [almost] anyone else will be better to work for.

Don’t know just how bad that operation was, but be careful, they might not be the worst . . .

Torquetalk

1st Nov 2021, 21:02

Bullying and arrogant narcissist management. Hmmn, bit of an industry pandemic right there. Sadly, the cuckoos are sure to inculcate themselves into a new nest and muck things up anew.

jimf671

8th Mar 2022, 19:37

I am expecting an Invitation to Submit Final Tender is being issued this month. That sort of timing would mean that by the end of May it is more or less all over. At that point, an internal review and assurance process is due to take place. We should expect the award letters to go out around late August which triggers a stand still period (10 days? 3 weeks?) after which a public announcement will be made.

Lots 1, 2, and 4 are now whittled down to BHL and EEA (CHC).

Lot 3 (FW & UAV) was 2Excel, EEA, and Elbit but I have no idea if that has been reduced further at the final stage. Anyone know?

UpAndDownAndUpAndDow

9th Mar 2022, 08:37

Forgive my naivety, and my wish to draw conclusions based on the wisdom of the other forum members, but I don't have much knowledge on UK SAR.

Is there a clear "favourite" to win the contract? I understand BHL have been running the UK SAR contract recently, and I believe have been doing a good job of it? Is there any reason why they wouldn't / shouldn't win the contract again this time around?

But then again, I believe EEA / CHC also run SAR in Ireland, so it's not as if they have no experience in the matter.

Any info and thoughts appreciated!

jimf671

9th Mar 2022, 13:29

BHL do SAR in the UK, northern Norway, Netherlands and elsewhere. Incumbent contractor. Bristow SAR (https://www.bristowgroup.com/services/search-and-rescue)

CHC do SAR in Ireland, contracts about to start in parts of Norway, and elsewhere. They had the UK contract for 4 HMCG bases from 2007 to 2013 and 2 of those until 2015/17 (lower spec than current UK SAR). CHC SAR and EMS. (http://www.chcheli.com/node/14)

In 2018/19, Qinetiq's Post Implementation Report (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/820125/S_39_-_ANNEX_B_UK_SARH_PIR_FINAL.pdf) examined the implementation of the current contract. There wasn't much wrong.

The UK Govt have let about 20 contracts for SAR helicopters since 1971 and only 4 of those have been won by companies not called Bristow.

helicrazi

9th Mar 2022, 20:12

They do a very good job on the coal face, no doubting that.

The balance sheet on the other hand...

Ant T

9th Mar 2022, 23:20

They do a very good job on the coal face, no doubting that.
The balance sheet on the other hand...Are they providing the service they were contracted to provide, at the price that was agreed? If so, then that sheet is balanced. (How it affects the overall government finances is a different matter).

Awarding a contract to the lowest bidder does not necessarily result in the best value for money. If the contractor is unable to fulfil the contract, it may result in penalties to the contractor, but also results in the customer not getting the required level of service.

JulieAndrews

10th Mar 2022, 14:34

....and you cannot levy penalties on a company if they have gone bust!

Variable Load

10th Mar 2022, 17:40

A UK business with only £1.68bn of debt on the books. What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/378681/bristow-helicopters-uk-business-debt/

jimf671

10th Mar 2022, 21:01

It was clear from the Bristow Group numbers during the early period of the contract that UK SAR was bringing in an important slice of reliable revenue without which the entire group may have had a very different future. As time went by it was clear that Baliff and co-conspirators were presenting an alternative reality in the books with things like SAR aircraft purchases being reported as shifted out impossibly far into the future. The way things turned out, that alternative reality must have stretched across the entire group.

With their six decades of experience of oil and gas ops, I am moderately confident in the ability of BHL and the usual suspects to take advantage of recent oil price changes.

minigundiplomat

10th Mar 2022, 23:20

A UK business with only £1.68bn of debt on the books. What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/378681/bristow-helicopters-uk-business-debt/

you could always go with one of its competitors.

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSL4N2PK1GS

detgnome

14th Jun 2022, 20:59

Anybody care to comment/speculate on rumours that CHC are no longer in the bid process?

jimf671

15th Jun 2022, 14:56

Anybody care to comment/speculate on rumours that CHC are no longer in the bid process?

"What is the Black Spot, Captain?"

Actually, the decisions should have been made by now for all the lots. Lot 1 - quick response helicopter, lot 2 - long range helicopter, lot 3 - FW and UAV, or lot 4 - combined.

My last estimate of the detailed timeline reads as follows.

Evaluation of Final Tenders - late May 2022 (so, decision made, but not declared to parties?)
Government Internal and Assurance Process - late May to late Aug 2022
Award Decision(s) Finalised - late Aug 2022
Standstill Letter(s) Issued - late Aug 2022
Contract(s) Completed With Supplier(s) - Sept 2022 (and announcement)

I am expecting the 'assurance process' to be in the traditions of the current government and take at least a month longer. However, the MCA/DfT have kept it on track so far which means they have already made their choices. These processes have certainly been known to leak in the past. :rolleyes: They have also been known to leak incorrectly. :E

CHC-out would mean Bristow win at least Lot 1 and Lot 2. The question then is Lot 3 (FW/UAV) or Lot 4 (Combined).

[Reminder.
There have been about 20 SAR helicopter contracts let by the UK government since 1971. Only three of those have been won by companies not called Bristow, or subsequently bought by Bristow.]

helihub

16th Jun 2022, 16:23

Anybody care to comment/speculate on rumours that CHC are no longer in the bid process?

I'm hearing that too

rrekn

21st Jul 2022, 14:13

It's official...

https://www.bristowgroup.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/511/bristow-awarded-second-generation-search-and-rescue

jimf671

23rd Jul 2022, 14:29

On Thursday, with no alternative competitors left, and knee-deep in political chaos that made any thought of a Government Assurance process ridiculous, the DfT/MCA abandoned the timetabled September announcement and awarded the UKSAR2G contract to Bristow and friends. The award is not yet in the government contract finder.

GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/uk-second-generation-search-and-rescue-aviation-programme-uksar2g)
Ministerial (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/transport-update-search-and-rescue)
Bristow (https://www.bristowgroup.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/511/bristow-awarded-second-generation-search-and-rescue)
FlightGlobal (https://www.flightglobal.com/farnborough-2022/bristow-wins-16bn-uksar2g-contract-and-shakes-up-fleet/149559.article?fbclid=IwAR1tHeui-r2Ju0m_x2y5b-vpJ3EkXirl7UKSCjtyNPuM5J2umM0e_BTQM38)
Vertical (https://verticalmag.com/news/bristow-wins-1-6b-uksar2g-contract/)

Although the current 2015 to 2026 contract seemed like a ground-breaking step forward, UKSAR2G is actually the first time that this has been done thoroughly based on a proper data set.

At the start of this bid process, the DfT/MCA team provided an air rescue data set and a software solution accessible to bidders that allowed them to run models to simulate their aircraft and base solutions.

This contrasts with 2011-13 when bases were "in the vicinity of" the results from November 2011's "10 Base Solution" which, although allowing some flexibility around the 10 locations, was quite a fixed solution. It made improvisations based upon an aggregate life saving capability across the UK SRR. Like all of the solutions of 2011; GAPSAR and that Main contract; these were rushed solutions that were forced upon the department and their contractors by the collapse of the 25 year PFI earlier in the year. All credit to the DfT, MCA, BHL and CHC for making all that work well in super quick time. :ok:

That is not where we are now. Witness, back to 12 bases including a part-time element, three different aircraft types, bases with different numbers of aircraft. Why? There are people dying over there and they are dying in a certain way and THAT is the solution. But over here there are people dying in a different way, at different times, and in different groups and THIS is the solution. :ok:

In some districts, AW139 may not be a welcome downsize. In Scotland, lack of S-92 seems like a problem for large searches. If anyone thinks we're going from Lewis or Kinlochbervie to Lee-on-Solent for training, they can #*&%£*#. :mad: It will probably work out fine. :cool:

And all the new aircraft are relatively cheap ones. And there are enough S-92 left over to do Ireland. :E

P3 Bellows

23rd Jul 2022, 22:13

Jim, why would you have to travel from Kinlochbervie to Lee-on-Solent for training?

jimf671

24th Jul 2022, 02:46

They are building a synthetic training facility at Lee. A stakeholder engagement phase is expected so perhaps that is when the planned balance of online, synthetic and live training will emerge.

[email protected]

24th Jul 2022, 09:38

Let's hope the training facility actually gets built this time - ISTR one was promised at Inverness for the previous/current contract.

However - good news for Bristow and all those ex-mil guys and girls who have made UKSAR such a success.

Brutal

24th Jul 2022, 11:12

[email protected]

24th Jul 2022, 11:21

Whatever height they fly, you are going to hear the S-92:)

Brutal

24th Jul 2022, 11:35

Yes but there's hearing an S92 overhead, and hearing one along with having the house shake and the family being woken up, are two different things.

B.

lowfat

24th Jul 2022, 12:53

I suspect you may be exaggerating a tad, They fly over my house regularly at night its not that bad. Don't forget they are going to help some one in need.

jimf671

24th Jul 2022, 14:13

Let's hope the training facility actually gets built this time - ISTR one was promised at Inverness for the previous/current contract.

Correct. And this contract means a significant step up in resources at Inverness, and some at Prestwick. The part-time elements at FtWm and Carlisle take workload pressure off both Inverness and Prestwick that should allow for more effective secondary activities.

However - good news for Bristow and all those ex-mil guys and girls who have made UKSAR such a success.
Yes. :ok: (Like the sleepless pilot I met in Tescos yesterday afternoon.)

jimf671

24th Jul 2022, 14:25

Crab..

I would rather there were less ex- mil guys as they can't seem to fly higher than a 1000 feet on a TRANSIT to a tasking on a GIN CLEAR NIGHT at 2 in the fuc%@ng MORNING flying over villages in a fu*+@ng S92 :mad: :ugh: (As witnessed multiple times looking out of my window backed up by flightradar)

By 2027, three regions of the UK will be relieved of their chore of worshipping the teflon helicopter company's great motherf#cking S-92 wind god.

At the same time, some SAR stakeholders may miss Helibus' passenger capacity when it comes to large area searches.

Brutal

24th Jul 2022, 21:55

Lowfat.

They maybe going to help someone in need, but a friend of mine works for the police, and while transiting across London at night en-route a job they fly as high as ATC allow to reduce noise? So there is NO excuse for transiting on a gin clear night (or day, for instance on weekends when the family is sitting out in the peaceful garden on a sunny day)!!! for these crews to p@ss off people on the ground?

B.

[email protected]

25th Jul 2022, 07:46

I really don't think they are doing it deliberately Brutal.

If they have just been launched on a SAR shout they will have far more things to think about than whose house they are flying over.

The vital thing is to get to the job ASAP so wasting time climbing to height isn't a priority.

Transiting across London with the very high population density is hardly comparable to flying over rural areas and if an S92 was operating regularly there, then people might have something to complain about.

I have landed at night in several London parks taking critically ill people to hospitals in a SAR Sea King over the years - and generated plenty of noise complaints doing so - sometimes you just have to suck it up or do you complain every time an ambulance goes past your house with blues and twos going?

Brutal

25th Jul 2022, 08:45

Jeeezz...I am not talking about climbing climbing to flight levels...climbing a little higher will make literally no difference. This isn't about flying over one persons house, it's about having some consideration to the general population. I am well away that they will have things to think about. However, if 4 people can't muster that extra ounce of brain power to think about neighbourly flying, then how do us poor single pilots manage when on Air ambulance shout? You're wrong as well about an S92 flying over London giving people something to complain about. Believe me, they complain about the 145's enough as it is.
Landing/departing at sites, arriving on scene and being low level , doing a recce etc, is part of the job an I don't care if people complain, this is not what I am talking about. Transiting low level to a job, as if you are still in the military is unnecessary and causes the general public to turn against helicopter noise, and that is not good for anyone.

B.

lowfat

25th Jul 2022, 09:25

Contact the base or Bristow sar HQ or departure airport with your concerns. They will have to listen to you and who know rebrief the ops procedure.

MFC_Fly

25th Jul 2022, 10:13

Crab..

I would rather there were less ex- mil guys as they can't seem to fly higher than a 1000 feet on a TRANSIT to a tasking on a GIN CLEAR NIGHT at 2 in the fuc%@ng MORNING flying over villages in a fu*+@ng S92 :mad: :ugh: (As witnessed multiple times looking out of my window backed up by flightradar)

B.
It must just be to annoy you then, they fly over my place at about 3,000' AGL :ok:

Anyway, who cares what height the transit at at 02:00 if they are out to save a life? I am sure you were back asleep within minutes, unlike the crew and their casualty.

[email protected]

25th Jul 2022, 10:35

Is this what you meant to write Jeeezz...I am not talking about climbing climbing to flight levels...climbing a little higher will make literally no difference You have said climbing a bit won't make any difference???? So what is the problem?

Brutal

25th Jul 2022, 10:43

[email protected]

25th Jul 2022, 13:25

Maybe they were a civvie crew https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif If they can manage it, maybe they can spread the word?
they are all civvy crew and they work to the same Ops manual - they won't have been military SAR for 7 years so if there is a message to get through, I'm pretty sure it has by now.

Baldeep Inminj

25th Jul 2022, 14:58

Sorry Crab, poor grammar...It would make virtually no difference in time to get to the scene. As demonstrated by the crews in MFC Fly's post above. Maybe they were a civvie crew :ok: If they can manage it, maybe they can spread the word?

B.
Simply not true - ever heard of wind - it gets stronger as you climb (usually). On a SAR shout, seconds can make the difference between life and death - we all know that. If my transit to the scene is into-wind then I am going as low as I can to minimize the impact...clearly with a tailwind I will cruise climb to get the advantage. Wind from the left?..then stay low as it veers to become a headwind in the Northern Hemisphere. Wind from the right - then climb as it becomes a tailwind.

My God, what do they teach nowadays???

On a rescue I could not give a single shred of a t0ss about who I annoy on the ground - it is about saving lives...period.

Brutal

25th Jul 2022, 17:40

Really, thanks for the lesson....BI.??

Even with the prevailing southerly wind they still fly northbound at low level...and southbound at low level...in fact, everywhere at low level...

Crab you know what I was implying. I was on about the ex-mil (NOW CIVVIES) having some sort of fear of heights..

B.

[email protected]

25th Jul 2022, 18:11

Crab you know what I was implying. I was on about the ex-mil (NOW CIVVIES) having some sort of fear of heights.. Brutal, I do know what you were implying, I just don't think it is in any way true.

I don't think they are being lazy or deliberately flying lower than required, they are following the rules to get the job done effectively - if they make some noise doing it then it is a function of having a very noisy helicopter - I could hear them coming from miles away when I was living in Newquay.

135s and 145s are whisper quiet in comparison.

jimf671

26th Jul 2022, 12:19

Iroquois mythology- Da-jo-ji, the mighty panther spirit of the west wind.
- Ga-oh, spirit of the wind.
- Ne-o-gah, the gentle fawn spirit of the south wind.
- O-yan-do-ne, the moose spirit of the east wind.
- Ya-o-gah, the destructive bear spirit of the north wind who is stopped by Ga-oh.
- S-92A, great big motherf8cker wind spirit

pants on fire...

26th Jul 2022, 13:07

they are all civvy crew and they work to the same Ops manual - they won't have been military SAR for 7 years so if there is a message to get through, I'm pretty sure it has by now.

Hopefully, they're not still threatening to put people on a charge as a means of demonstrating their authority! I don't believe that was ever in the civilian Ops manual?

chopper2004

7th Dec 2022, 11:20

In a strange almost back-to-the-future, when thee was AW139 bakc in the day, Bristow going to buy six AW139 to join the 9 AW189 for the UK SAR2G ot be delivered between 2023 and 2024

https://www.leonardo.com/en/press-release-detail/-/detail/07-12-2022-leonardo-bristow-to-purchase-six-aw139-helicopters-to-support-its-uksar2g-search-and-rescue-programme

cheers

[email protected]

7th Dec 2022, 16:04

I don't think the 189 has been as great as expected and has almost as bad downwash as the S-92

Hot_LZ

7th Dec 2022, 21:22

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the AW189. Although late to the party, it’s been a good aircraft since it’s arrival!

The reintroduction of the AW139 is perhaps realised by the fact that those bases that will receive it perhaps don’t need the legs of the AW189.

LZ

[email protected]

7th Dec 2022, 23:18

I've been told it is much about downwash..

If it's not then why the change?

jimf671

8th Dec 2022, 04:37

SK and Whirlwind are out of service I'm afraid, so all 6, 8, 12 tonne helicopters in the 2020s are going to have sh1tloads of downwash and we're all safer in the air because of it. Realistically, not just S-92 have downwash issues and there have been downwash incidents with 135s. There has been some recent research going on about downwash and the effects on loads below the aircraft and a pattern has been emerging related to the aircraft weight, rotor disc area, and air density. More work on this is expected to produce something worthwhile that can be added to a RFM near you in the future.

189 has performed well and done jobs far out to sea that some might have expected would be solely S-92 territory. I haven't seen any specifics about the economics but it's not hard to imagine a significant cost margin between the types. With the 189's speed, range and payload there may just be no need to pay for a S-92.

Scotland will be an all-189 territory and there is not much to complain about with that. The S-92 has been described as a very stable winching platform in challenging mountain conditions and for large searches one might imagine it deploying more MRT. Realistically though, there's not really much difference overall.

What does surprise me is the number of 139. It has been described by paramedics as not having enough room for them to do proper work on a patient. Some of us may have heard that complaint about Merlins from people used to Chinooks but once you get down to the size of the 139 and there is a long flight back to dry land I think I can see how it could be difficult to keep a seriously injured patient alive and stable. Having said that, there is BHL data available from operation of 139 at Lydd and St Athans 2015-2018 and of course CHC at Portland and Lee-on-Solent for 10 years up until 2017.

The current contract, although very good, has to some extent been a quick-fix, one size fits all, sort of a spec. That came about after the collapse of the PFI. I can see from the way the spec was laid out from the very start that UKSAR2G is far more aligned with the real data that has been collected since 2015. Even on the PFI, this quality of data wasn't really available since, as the NAO pointed out many years before, the MoD and DfT were not measuring the same things and did not co-ordinate their statistics.

lowfat

8th Dec 2022, 07:34

I've been told it is much about downwash..

If it's not then why the change?

Costs, a 139 is cheaper in every respect to a 189 and s92a. purchase, lease and fuel costs. the only constant is the crew.

ericferret

8th Dec 2022, 10:54

Costs, a 139 is cheaper in every respect to a 189 and s92a. purchase, lease and fuel costs. the only constant is the crew.

In addition the 139 has matured into a very reliable aircraft.

[email protected]

9th Dec 2022, 09:13

My information came from someone who operates the aircraft on a daily basis, in role - I'll let them know they are wrong.....

finalchecksplease

9th Dec 2022, 09:49

Unlike the previous SAR contract which was very prescriptive for UKSAR2G the bidders were asked to come up with solutions which met all the requirements. As cost is a big factor in any contract bidding process the Bristow solution uses a mix of airframes with less S92 (replaced with AW189's) and some of the AW189's replaced with AW139's while still achieving all the requirements.
So all down to costs savings, nothing to do with rotor downwash.

snakepit

10th Dec 2022, 09:37

My information came from someone who operates the aircraft on a daily basis, in role - I'll let them know they are wrong.....

How an aircraft operates in role is influenced strongly by ‘who’ is operating it.

One operator can have a very serviceable and capable aircraft due to a solid spares and servicing package and another operator of the same type can find their aircraft/fleet spends more time on the ground due to lack of same.

The way different operators maintain the same aircraft has markedly different results. Just because you happen to ‘know someone’ who flys the aircraft has no real bearing on the types abilities.

[email protected]

10th Dec 2022, 11:45

How an aircraft operates in role is influenced strongly by ‘who’ is operating it.

One operator can have a very serviceable and capable aircraft due to a solid spares and servicing package and another operator of the same type can find their aircraft/fleet spends more time on the ground due to lack of same.

The way different operators maintain the same aircraft has markedly different results. Just because you happen to ‘know someone’ who flys the aircraft has no real bearing on the types abilities.

So someone in UKSAR flying the aircraft on a daily basis and knows it's abilities intimately has no valid opinion then?

Hot_LZ

10th Dec 2022, 13:26

I've been told it is much about downwash..

If it's not then why the change?

Downwash is a consideration of operating the 189, as it should be with every aircraft but it had absolutely no influence on the change of types in the South. As another poster has stated, the selection of types for 2G had been based on contract requirements, data harvested over the last 9 years and the obvious commercial/financial component.

Why operate a 189 at additional cost when the 139 can achieve the end result just aswell?

LZ

snakepit

10th Dec 2022, 14:52

So someone in UKSAR flying the aircraft on a daily basis and knows it's abilities intimately has no valid opinion then?

My bad crab. Thought you were referring to the AW139 not the 189. 🤦🏻‍♂️

jimf671

11th Dec 2022, 16:51

Downwash is a consideration of operating the 189, as it should be with every aircraft but it had absolutely no influence on the change of types in the South. As another poster has stated, the selection of types for 2G had been based on contract requirements, data harvested over the last 9 years and the obvious commercial/financial component.

Why operate a 189 at additional cost when the 139 can achieve the end result just aswell?

LZ

I wonder what is being bid for the Irish contract bearing in mind the number of spare SAR-fit S-92A there will be?

lowfat

12th Dec 2022, 08:40

I wonder what is being bid for the Irish contract bearing in mind the number of spare SAR-fit S-92A there will be?
well as the government /army tried to bid 139s for the Dublin base its a good bet to suggest 139

P3 Bellows

9th Oct 2023, 17:07

https://www.orcadian.co.uk/proposals-to-quadruple-coastguard-helicopter-response-times-queried/

It is being reported in the Orcadian that the MCA is planning to change the readiness state of the Sumburgh aircraft to 60 minutes all day. This is a change from 15 minutes 08:00-22:00 and thereafter, 45 minutes over night.

Perhaps it’s time for Bond, Babcock, OSHUK or whatever they are called this week to expand and put a machine in Sumburgh to cater for the helicopter traffic and offshore MEDEVAC flights.

Seems like a very odd move.

P3

[email protected]

9th Oct 2023, 17:53

Yes, does seem very odd.

OvertHawk

10th Oct 2023, 08:13

Cant' see any benefit to that!

The only reason i could suggest would be if it meant they could crew the operation with fewer people.

But i don't see that it would make a difference - you will still require a duty crew regardless of what readiness they are on. ( Unless the CAA would allow them to do longer shifts if they are on increased readiness? - Can't see it though)

I wonder if this is simply an example of 'We've agreed it up to such and such date, with no particular intention to change it thereafter, but we've not formalised it yet'?

jimf671

10th Oct 2023, 16:27

In the draught SSUN for the UKSAR2G contract, the "Measure of Effectiveness (Threshold)" for readiness is the same as the current state, being as follows.
"Lot 1, Lot 2 (Helicopter): 15 Minutes 08:00-22:00, 45 minutes 22:01 -07:59."
"Lot 3 (UAV): 45 Minutes 08:00-22:00, 60 minutes 22:01 -07:59."
Meanwhile, the spec the bidders were encouraged to aim for, in the next column, was as follows.
"Measure of Effectiveness (Objective)"
"Higher Readiness State than Threshold level for both Readiness State times"

What would be nice is if this was simply a mix up with the Lot 3 figure for the UAV fleet. However, since "Discussions relating to readiness states beyond this date are ongoing." is attributed to 'an MCA spokeswoman', I remain concerned.

Remind me. How long does it take to drown?

P3 Bellows

10th Oct 2023, 18:16

I believe the 60 minutes is to save on duty hours as the crews will be on standby at home. They can therefore operate with fewer crews and reduce costs accordingly.

P3

jeepys

10th Oct 2023, 19:49

That's all well and good but finding crews to live on the Island might be difficult.

[email protected]

11th Oct 2023, 05:59

jimf671

11th Oct 2023, 17:49

Perhaps they have done an analysis of the type and number of callouts Sumburgh get and identified that they are mostly long-range or medevac style ops rather than the short range quick jobs you get at flights in busy tourist areas.

That is what the MCA's online modelling software provided during the bid process. :cool:

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1366x768/image_2023_10_11_182100533_b2f65b0d571201468a46bbe07e8fd5607 d35c815.png

Then they awarded a contract based on all of that, getting it for a price that is an estimated (JF) 1.3%pa below inflation compared the last one, and then ... ... something else ... what? :confused:

jimf671

17th Dec 2023, 14:33

The words "too prescriptive" or "overly prescriptive" were used many times is the UKSAR2G process. So many good ideas emerged. Did somebody forget to take minutes?

For the current UKSAR2015/26 contract, I have a complete set of documents made publicly available shortly after award. Having, since then, "taken back control" (nearly fkn choked typing that!) not only do I not know exactly what the £1.6bn UKSAR2G contract entails but there is evidence that neither the DfT nor BHL know what it entails either since they appear to still be, well, not negotiating, but stumbling about in a fog of their own creation. Thus the 60 minute thing, and more.

Simple contract: complicated outcome?