SAR going out to contract.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
I'm a SAR p1 for CHC in Shannon. We get 60 hours a month to train with in an aircraft almost identical to the Seaking. In the 5 years I have been here, there have been very few jobs turned down.... almost none. Of those that have, there are none that I know of that resulted in loss of life.
The co. receives receive VERY stiff financial penalties if we are offline or reduced in capability for any reason. If the aircraft goes u/s they will jump thru hoops to get it back online. And at the end of the day we do what we are told to do by our client... the Coastguard. If they want "more" the government have to pay more... but then again a military op. would be the same.
When the contracts come up for renewal the client gets offers from all prospective bidders and gets the best for its buck. Subsequently we get audited by the client, the IAA, and internally on a very regular basis... If theres a snag it is addressed until the Coastguard are happy.
We have had pilots and rearcrew from all backgrounds including RAF. Most were excellent, some were average but it was the individual rather than the background that was the common factor in the best of them.
I have no doubt that the RAF have provided an excellent service. I hope they still do. But thats not to say that others cant provide an equally good service too.... regardless of how the cash gets from the taxpayer to the winch hook.
I'm a SAR p1 for CHC in Shannon. We get 60 hours a month to train with in an aircraft almost identical to the Seaking. In the 5 years I have been here, there have been very few jobs turned down.... almost none. Of those that have, there are none that I know of that resulted in loss of life.
The co. receives receive VERY stiff financial penalties if we are offline or reduced in capability for any reason. If the aircraft goes u/s they will jump thru hoops to get it back online. And at the end of the day we do what we are told to do by our client... the Coastguard. If they want "more" the government have to pay more... but then again a military op. would be the same.
When the contracts come up for renewal the client gets offers from all prospective bidders and gets the best for its buck. Subsequently we get audited by the client, the IAA, and internally on a very regular basis... If theres a snag it is addressed until the Coastguard are happy.
We have had pilots and rearcrew from all backgrounds including RAF. Most were excellent, some were average but it was the individual rather than the background that was the common factor in the best of them.
I have no doubt that the RAF have provided an excellent service. I hope they still do. But thats not to say that others cant provide an equally good service too.... regardless of how the cash gets from the taxpayer to the winch hook.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North of the Border
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
60 million a year???? And how much change would a civvy contractor get for providing the full SAR package - cabs, crew and maintainance?? Me thinks the military are being ripped off. Again.
(Evil laugh!)
Blame My Parrot
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somerdorset, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regret AM only - however, it did give me time to reflect on the 60th anniversary of our successful defence against another vertically challenged moustachioed megalomaniac!!
VG
VG
Decks - that means you get less than half the training that we do and rather confirms my concern. All the auditing and bean counting doesn't look at capability just cost effectiveness so as long as your customer (CG) is happy then so are the bean counters. Who checks your operational effectiveness?
The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry. They just can't answer the fact that Bristows produce stunning serviceability from S61s that have 3 times the number of hours of our Sea kings!
The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry. They just can't answer the fact that Bristows produce stunning serviceability from S61s that have 3 times the number of hours of our Sea kings!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry. They just can't answer the fact that Bristows produce stunning serviceability from S61s that have 3 times the number of hours of our Sea kings!"
Crab
Perhaps the money Bristows are saving on training is being spent on spares.
Regards
Retard
Crab
Perhaps the money Bristows are saving on training is being spent on spares.
Regards
Retard
rafloo, I hope that was meant tongue-in-cheek or you have missed the point of the previous posts! 12.5% serviceablity is pathetically poor and if true then the IPTL needs shooting! So no over servicing here then!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
In response to your point re hours I think 60 per base is sufficent.
We have 8 pilots and 8 crewmen per base who are doing nothing only SAR. 720 hours annually gives 180 per pilot (and per crewman)and this IMHO is enough. Do you average a lot more? We have a wall planner with a list of around 30 items all of which must be done within a specific time period...usually 90 days. In reality we get to do most of the skills on a much more regular basis.
The operational audits are done by an independant auditor employed by the IRCG. He decides if we're doing what it says on the tin. Again he decides what is needed, reviews this on a regular basis and makes his reports and recommendations to the IRCG.
The key word as you rightly point out is cost effectiveness. The bean counters are not some guys who hoard the money if they dont spend it. They are giving it to the cancer units and the homeless folks etc. And there is huge competition for this money. Every night of the week there is a documentary from some deserving group looking for more funding. Another SAR unit or a cancer unit???? Its up to the politicians.
In civvie SAR the goal is to provide the very best service on a finite budget. (Obviously budget is never a consideration on a job.)The bidding competition gives companies the opportunity to do the best they can with the cost base they have. If they make some money, then it motivates them to do it well so they can renew their contract. Is it perfect...? no.. but does it work well?...yes.
I would love to see 10 S92's on the coast at purpose built airfields, with FLIR, NVG and a fleet of vessells at their disposal for training. But unless Abramovich buys Ireland then it aint going to happen!!!
In response to your point re hours I think 60 per base is sufficent.
We have 8 pilots and 8 crewmen per base who are doing nothing only SAR. 720 hours annually gives 180 per pilot (and per crewman)and this IMHO is enough. Do you average a lot more? We have a wall planner with a list of around 30 items all of which must be done within a specific time period...usually 90 days. In reality we get to do most of the skills on a much more regular basis.
The operational audits are done by an independant auditor employed by the IRCG. He decides if we're doing what it says on the tin. Again he decides what is needed, reviews this on a regular basis and makes his reports and recommendations to the IRCG.
The key word as you rightly point out is cost effectiveness. The bean counters are not some guys who hoard the money if they dont spend it. They are giving it to the cancer units and the homeless folks etc. And there is huge competition for this money. Every night of the week there is a documentary from some deserving group looking for more funding. Another SAR unit or a cancer unit???? Its up to the politicians.
In civvie SAR the goal is to provide the very best service on a finite budget. (Obviously budget is never a consideration on a job.)The bidding competition gives companies the opportunity to do the best they can with the cost base they have. If they make some money, then it motivates them to do it well so they can renew their contract. Is it perfect...? no.. but does it work well?...yes.
I would love to see 10 S92's on the coast at purpose built airfields, with FLIR, NVG and a fleet of vessells at their disposal for training. But unless Abramovich buys Ireland then it aint going to happen!!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SE490618
Age: 64
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not tongue in cheek at all. The reason our aircraft are u/s for 88% of the time is because we over-maintain them. In the air force we have approx 12 maintainers/engineers per aircraft. Bristows have 2. Our helicopters require in the order of 6 maintenance hours per flying hours. Bristows require 3 per flying hour.
The aircraft in the Armed forces are here to provide work for our engineers....not to fly
The aircraft in the Armed forces are here to provide work for our engineers....not to fly
Decks - we have 10 pilots and 10 rearcrew on average per flight but that allows support for courses, Falklands detachments etc. On an average day a crew will fly 2 hrs day and 2 hrs night although this could be cut down if we were not forced into stats chasing to meet our mandatory requirements.
Does the independent auditor fly with you to check your operational capability and effectiveness or is airborne performance not seen as part of the audit process?
We have pilot and rearcrew instructors on each flight, a squadron trg team for assessment and a SARF standards unit for checking the overall effectiveness on the ground and in the air.
Does the independent auditor fly with you to check your operational capability and effectiveness or is airborne performance not seen as part of the audit process?
We have pilot and rearcrew instructors on each flight, a squadron trg team for assessment and a SARF standards unit for checking the overall effectiveness on the ground and in the air.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: nearby
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have pilot and rearcrew instructors on each flight, a squadron trg team for assessment and a SARF standards unit for checking the overall effectiveness on the ground and in the air.
Perhaps may moons ago the RAF could justify its superior position but not now - old, u/s aircraft flown by quite inexperienced crews - the writing is on the wall.
Blame My Parrot
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somerdorset, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab (and subsequent ranters post 1900 on 17th!)
["The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry."]
I think you will find that the 12.5 figure is not a percentage - rather an average number of available aircraft per day.
Not even the most inept tabloid journalist would believe any organisation would be happy with 12.5% equipment serviceability
VG
["The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry."]
I think you will find that the 12.5 figure is not a percentage - rather an average number of available aircraft per day.
Not even the most inept tabloid journalist would believe any organisation would be happy with 12.5% equipment serviceability
VG