Sar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sar
Has anyone noticed the huge amount of unhappy people at work and across the flights?
Shift changes.
Redundancy.
PVR.
We are getting tired.
When will someone up above help?
Will this speed up the transition?
The engineers are getting made redundant on the Friday then sign onto a new contract on the Monday.
True? No, but sounds as crazy as everything else that is happening.
Last edited by Yellowbaron; 23rd Nov 2005 at 15:15.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MCA has notified Bristows that the preferred bidder for the Coastguard SAR helicopter contract is CHC/Scotia.
Bristows wanted to carry on with the S61 for the period 2007-2012 or until a definite decision was made about the harmonisation aircraft. However, Scotia have bid with a mixture of S92s and the AB139, placing themselves fair and square in the frame for the harmonisation contract.
Bristows wanted to carry on with the S61 for the period 2007-2012 or until a definite decision was made about the harmonisation aircraft. However, Scotia have bid with a mixture of S92s and the AB139, placing themselves fair and square in the frame for the harmonisation contract.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vecvechookattack
Interesting statement. Why do you consider the S92 and AB139 brill? neither aircraft is certified nor approved nor proven in the SAR role. The AB139 has no icing clearance and a max rotor engagement windspeed of 27 kts.
Doesn't sound that brill!
Interesting statement. Why do you consider the S92 and AB139 brill? neither aircraft is certified nor approved nor proven in the SAR role. The AB139 has no icing clearance and a max rotor engagement windspeed of 27 kts.
Doesn't sound that brill!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The S92 is a little too big for my liking. Having a vast experience of both Military and Civil SAR operations (remember Plymouth Rescue ?) I'd have to plump for the AB139. Fast, light and agile it will prove a real asset to the MCA.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What aircraft is used for harmonisation depends on many factors. The three main contenders seem to be the S92 the EC225 and the EH101. All aircraft have their pluses and minuses. Vested interest, political maneouvering and economics will play a part in the decision.
Other questions to be answered are; how will they be manned? Where will they be based? What will the command structure be?
Other questions to be answered are; how will they be manned? Where will they be based? What will the command structure be?
....and will CHC give us all jobs when the military disown us and hand over SAR lock stock and barrel?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The command structure of the new harmonised SAR helicopter units is a very interesting question. The Treasury, the MCA and civilian helicopter operators would like to see a commercial, civilian SAR force. Commercial operators are cheaper and more efficient. However, the training and more importantly the PR value to the military cannot be overlooked. AFC's alround to a military crews rescuing people from the roofs of Boscastle makes very good press.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SARowl,
I agree that the S92 is a contender for harmonization, but not the current S92A.
In 4 years time a civil S92B will be a spin off from the Canadian Cyclone S92. For a good SAR machine the S92 will need some more power, so the CT7-8C not the current -8A. It will need more payload, the basic S92 is very heavy and so a weight increase above the current 26,500 lb will be needed - so perhaps a new gearbox as well?
The proposed fly by wire version will be nice and improve handling qualities. Also a 5 bladed head to reduce the vibration.
So, the S92B will be a contender but it won't be around for a few years yet.
vecvechookattack
When you hang a hoist (or two), a FLIR & Skyshout off the side..fill up the back with SAR kit, the fast and agile AB 139 will be a bit more sluggish. You can't squeeze a quart into a pint pot!
RI
I agree that the S92 is a contender for harmonization, but not the current S92A.
In 4 years time a civil S92B will be a spin off from the Canadian Cyclone S92. For a good SAR machine the S92 will need some more power, so the CT7-8C not the current -8A. It will need more payload, the basic S92 is very heavy and so a weight increase above the current 26,500 lb will be needed - so perhaps a new gearbox as well?
The proposed fly by wire version will be nice and improve handling qualities. Also a 5 bladed head to reduce the vibration.
So, the S92B will be a contender but it won't be around for a few years yet.
vecvechookattack
When you hang a hoist (or two), a FLIR & Skyshout off the side..fill up the back with SAR kit, the fast and agile AB 139 will be a bit more sluggish. You can't squeeze a quart into a pint pot!
RI
Helibelly - Serf seems to have answered your question.