SAR - staying military?
SAR - staying military?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Darkest Wiltshire
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not so much the chop but a gentle drift toward contractorisation.
Much cheaper than service crews and just as efficient/courageous/determined to get 'those in peril on the sea'
out of it.
Taff
Much cheaper than service crews and just as efficient/courageous/determined to get 'those in peril on the sea'
out of it.
Taff
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No reason why civvie crews can't do night mountains given the right authority - whether they would want to is another matter!
The days when NVG flying was a purely military domain are going but the amount of training may preclude a commercial operation. It certainly wouldn't be the skills involved as contrary to popular opinion it is not rocket science and believe it or not there are commercial operators who are just as good, doing a lot more with a lot less!
The days when NVG flying was a purely military domain are going but the amount of training may preclude a commercial operation. It certainly wouldn't be the skills involved as contrary to popular opinion it is not rocket science and believe it or not there are commercial operators who are just as good, doing a lot more with a lot less!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who are we kidding, of course a civilian outfit could do SAR as well as the military. Given the same training resources and decent NVGs, they'd be every bit as good as the RAF and RN. Defeatist, no just realist. Dust-off your demob suits or look for a posting to SH.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: North of somewhere south
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite agree, mil as the only people who do any nvg flying are coming to an end. The downside, as you have quite rightly pointed out you need a suitable nvg training programme and currency - all of which costs money.
I hope it does get contracted out(SAR - that is) as any organisation which sells it's blokes(NCAs or Airmen Aircrew) a dream and then shafts them for pursuing that dream is not the one I want to work for.
I just enjoy SAR.
How is Inverness and the Air Amb?
I hope it does get contracted out(SAR - that is) as any organisation which sells it's blokes(NCAs or Airmen Aircrew) a dream and then shafts them for pursuing that dream is not the one I want to work for.
I just enjoy SAR.
How is Inverness and the Air Amb?
)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate to disappoint all those in the civilian world who would love to do SAR, and are idly speculating on the imminent demise of military SAR. I have no doubt that you could find pilots/crews who could do just as good a job as those in the military, given the right kit and authority.
However...
It has come down from on high (very very high) that RAF SAR is not for sale (and by inference, RN SAR too). And to be fair, I do actually believe them. About the best PR the RAF has going, in fact. So nothing is likely to happen until the Sea King goes out of service, which is almost certainly not for another decade at least. Anything else anybody says is either them fishing, idly speculating or just plain wishful thinking. What will happen when we lose the Sea King however is another matter entirely...
SBW
However...
It has come down from on high (very very high) that RAF SAR is not for sale (and by inference, RN SAR too). And to be fair, I do actually believe them. About the best PR the RAF has going, in fact. So nothing is likely to happen until the Sea King goes out of service, which is almost certainly not for another decade at least. Anything else anybody says is either them fishing, idly speculating or just plain wishful thinking. What will happen when we lose the Sea King however is another matter entirely...
SBW
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SBW.
You seem to have convinced yourself where UK SAR is going, but the majority will need more solid evidence. Once the MCA harmonisation initiative is underway we should have a better idea. In the meantime, keep taking the loyalty tablets.
You seem to have convinced yourself where UK SAR is going, but the majority will need more solid evidence. Once the MCA harmonisation initiative is underway we should have a better idea. In the meantime, keep taking the loyalty tablets.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not that the civilians desparately want to do SAR for any altruistic reasons, although I'm sure that many would, but financially it means a great deal to the commercial operators (only one company in the running?).
Anything that pays the rent and provides a secure job is worthwhile. If it happens to be rewarding, satisfying etc. then so much the better. Lets not forget that 37% of SAR in the UK is already done by civilians with older aircraft and a good deal less staff. Agreed, they don't go to the mountains at night but there again nor does the majority of military SAR flights if we are honest. Not many mountains in East Anglia for example. From previous comments, I don't remember all of HMCG's aircraft being off at the same time; if they did they would surely be in breach of contract which is why they provide a replacement.
The mere fact that it has come from "high" about SAR's status would concern me greatly!
Oh, this is a rumour network, so idle speculation is probably allowed!
Anything that pays the rent and provides a secure job is worthwhile. If it happens to be rewarding, satisfying etc. then so much the better. Lets not forget that 37% of SAR in the UK is already done by civilians with older aircraft and a good deal less staff. Agreed, they don't go to the mountains at night but there again nor does the majority of military SAR flights if we are honest. Not many mountains in East Anglia for example. From previous comments, I don't remember all of HMCG's aircraft being off at the same time; if they did they would surely be in breach of contract which is why they provide a replacement.
The mere fact that it has come from "high" about SAR's status would concern me greatly!
Oh, this is a rumour network, so idle speculation is probably allowed!
Apache for HEMS - Strafe those Survivors!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dear old Sea King has done a tremendous job over the years, but being bounced around at high AUM in crappy weather takes its toll on any airframe, especially an old one. If you then slash spares support you get the level of serviceability now being experienced, despite the best efforts of the engineers.
I know that the Sea King has had its OSD shifted off into the distance and senior officers may well be saying RAF SAR is not for sale... BUT the military role of SAR was essentially a cold war task and doesn't fit into todays expeditionary operations terribly well. There is nothing in the role that could not be done by contract crews flying modern civil aircraft. Things to be gained by this change; new, faster, more capable, more serviceable aircraft: a lot less personnel required to manage and run the operation; no military pensions or salaries to pay.
Most important for MoD is the money saved by taking this approach, they may even be able to shift the whole financial burden across to DoT. I know SAR isn't that expensive compared to eurofighter etc but when you're skint if you can save a few million here or there and the job still gets done. It is all slightly sad but this has been on the cards for a long time. I think that when the MCA contracts come up for renewal there could be some serious changes. Also, unlike the military any civil company could ramp up to take it all over within 18 months to 2 years of contract award and that includes getting aircraft and crews ready.
I know that the Sea King has had its OSD shifted off into the distance and senior officers may well be saying RAF SAR is not for sale... BUT the military role of SAR was essentially a cold war task and doesn't fit into todays expeditionary operations terribly well. There is nothing in the role that could not be done by contract crews flying modern civil aircraft. Things to be gained by this change; new, faster, more capable, more serviceable aircraft: a lot less personnel required to manage and run the operation; no military pensions or salaries to pay.
Most important for MoD is the money saved by taking this approach, they may even be able to shift the whole financial burden across to DoT. I know SAR isn't that expensive compared to eurofighter etc but when you're skint if you can save a few million here or there and the job still gets done. It is all slightly sad but this has been on the cards for a long time. I think that when the MCA contracts come up for renewal there could be some serious changes. Also, unlike the military any civil company could ramp up to take it all over within 18 months to 2 years of contract award and that includes getting aircraft and crews ready.
The needs of Military SAR as I knew it when a RAF helicopter pilot, have evolved.
There is the 'conventional' onshore and maritime role, which is currently covered by RN, RAF and HMCG aircraft and crews.
And there is Combat SAR, highly specialised and requiring state-of-art equipment to maximise success potential. This is the area where military resources must be concentrated.
There is no reason to fret about potential contractorisation of military SAR units around the UK coast. Existing HMCG crews are highly professional and the airframes, though elderly, have a high standard of equipment, sometimes exceeding the spec of their military counterparts.
If you want to see a state of art civilian SAR helicopter, look no further than the BP 'Jigsaw' AS332 aircraft with an equipment installation designed by a well-known North Sea helicopter company. It's now working. (And, btw, if this had been a military project it would still be in the discussion phase!)
One final point: training. If you contractorise, you must make adequate (financial/contractual) allowance for both continuation training and the initial training of crews.
There is the 'conventional' onshore and maritime role, which is currently covered by RN, RAF and HMCG aircraft and crews.
And there is Combat SAR, highly specialised and requiring state-of-art equipment to maximise success potential. This is the area where military resources must be concentrated.
There is no reason to fret about potential contractorisation of military SAR units around the UK coast. Existing HMCG crews are highly professional and the airframes, though elderly, have a high standard of equipment, sometimes exceeding the spec of their military counterparts.
If you want to see a state of art civilian SAR helicopter, look no further than the BP 'Jigsaw' AS332 aircraft with an equipment installation designed by a well-known North Sea helicopter company. It's now working. (And, btw, if this had been a military project it would still be in the discussion phase!)
One final point: training. If you contractorise, you must make adequate (financial/contractual) allowance for both continuation training and the initial training of crews.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: North of somewhere south
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Cyclic. I am very sorry about the potential unmasking of you. You are absolutely right it was thoughtless and very very stupid. As a result this has the potential of being my last post as I am a little thick after a few beers and this is when I post usually.
2. The skill set that the SAR boys have developed over time is of great use to the MOD, but does SAR need to be military or can the military send their guys to learn of the SAR boys - that is probably the question.
as long as it is funded and regualted properly ie allowing crews to do the job required why can't it be done by civilians? no reason as far as I can see.
OOPS 78 signing off.
2. The skill set that the SAR boys have developed over time is of great use to the MOD, but does SAR need to be military or can the military send their guys to learn of the SAR boys - that is probably the question.
as long as it is funded and regualted properly ie allowing crews to do the job required why can't it be done by civilians? no reason as far as I can see.
OOPS 78 signing off.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The posts on this thread re the unserviceability of the SAR aircraft shocked me.
Let me get this straight:
The RAF have 6 SAR bases in the UK.
I assume that at every base, there is a "main aircraft plus at least one spare.
So does that mean that there are times when the RAF cannot get one out of twelve aircraft serviceable?
And the top level people want the Seaking to be around for another 10 years or more?????
I know that this is a simplistic view, but it seems to me that someone at a high level is not doing their job properly.
Does anyone know what the serviceability of the Coastguard machines are?
Let me get this straight:
The RAF have 6 SAR bases in the UK.
I assume that at every base, there is a "main aircraft plus at least one spare.
So does that mean that there are times when the RAF cannot get one out of twelve aircraft serviceable?
And the top level people want the Seaking to be around for another 10 years or more?????
I know that this is a simplistic view, but it seems to me that someone at a high level is not doing their job properly.
Does anyone know what the serviceability of the Coastguard machines are?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the gentle slide to contractorisation is about right. It will take time because we already have problems with civilian flying regulations (CAA not company) which is effectively what precludes the Coastguard contractors from doing overland rescue - I know its only bureaucracy but think how long it would take to change the legislation.
The gentle slide has begun with contracted engineering support and now aircraft (in Cyprus) but so long as they are military registered and operated then the marvellous ANO doesn't apply.
There are many reasons why the final step might be a long way off:
a. PR for the RAF from SAR is immense and goes some way to offsetting the bad vibes created by low flying.
b. Maintaining a full skill set in mountain flying and NVG would be very expensive and thus a contractor might struggle to compete with the public sector comparator. Operators such as Bond with Police and Air Ambulance contracts already struggle to give their pilots more than basic currency.
c. SAR flyers can do other things and thus are part of the overall GD cadre which supports the whole executive branch of the RAF.
d. There is still a need for some deployable SAR for the expeditionary RAF - they don't have to be in Yellow Choppers but the skill sets remain the same.
There are probably more but this is beginning to look like Ascoteers multiple choice.
The gentle slide has begun with contracted engineering support and now aircraft (in Cyprus) but so long as they are military registered and operated then the marvellous ANO doesn't apply.
There are many reasons why the final step might be a long way off:
a. PR for the RAF from SAR is immense and goes some way to offsetting the bad vibes created by low flying.
b. Maintaining a full skill set in mountain flying and NVG would be very expensive and thus a contractor might struggle to compete with the public sector comparator. Operators such as Bond with Police and Air Ambulance contracts already struggle to give their pilots more than basic currency.
c. SAR flyers can do other things and thus are part of the overall GD cadre which supports the whole executive branch of the RAF.
d. There is still a need for some deployable SAR for the expeditionary RAF - they don't have to be in Yellow Choppers but the skill sets remain the same.
There are probably more but this is beginning to look like Ascoteers multiple choice.