Is it worth keeping military SAR?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it worth keeping military SAR?
Folks
As an advocate of military types flying around rescuing people, is there anyone out there with a view on whether we should bite the financial bullet and keep mil SAR running long term? Or should we gracefully accept defeat and acknowledge that civilianisation is the way ahead?
How does UK PLC benefit from the RAF/RN doing the jobs?
As an advocate of military types flying around rescuing people, is there anyone out there with a view on whether we should bite the financial bullet and keep mil SAR running long term? Or should we gracefully accept defeat and acknowledge that civilianisation is the way ahead?
How does UK PLC benefit from the RAF/RN doing the jobs?
Last edited by scottishbeefer; 22nd Feb 2006 at 10:40. Reason: spelling!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Durkadurkastan
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure the rotary mates will pile in one this one but one good reason for keeping SAR (in peacetime) is that it leads nicely into JPR on operations.
Oh, and it's great PR to see a bright yellow whirly-gig hovering over a sinking yacht or some flooded Cornish countryside.
Oh, and it's great PR to see a bright yellow whirly-gig hovering over a sinking yacht or some flooded Cornish countryside.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JPR and peace time SAR are, sadly, two very seperate occupations which have less in common with each other than most people might think.
Have to agree that after the Seaking retires most of UK SAR will probably go civilian, with perhaps an occasional military crew being slotted in for appearances sake.
Have to agree that after the Seaking retires most of UK SAR will probably go civilian, with perhaps an occasional military crew being slotted in for appearances sake.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTIDS
Not so (doctrinally)
JWP 3-66 Joint Personnel Recovery
Not so (doctrinally)
JWP 3-66 Joint Personnel Recovery
... JPR includes Search and Rescue (SAR), Deployable Search & Rescue(DSAR), Combat Recovery(CR), Combat Search and Rescue(CSAR)... ... This represents a broad span of different types of operation covering a disparate group of missions. roles and tasks but consolidated into a single and coherent[sic] covering a number of parameters, the principal ones being location adn threat.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the justifications often quoted for keeping a military SAR force is CSAR; but since the Falklands the MoD has not, as far as I can recall, detached any SAR assets with forces going to operational theatres... any SAR requirement has been met by assets on scene (or assumed that we could call upon the assistance of Unckie Sam to help us out)
I feel CSAR is destined to become a secondary role for SH, whilst the UK shores are protected by the Coastguard... or maybe RNLI helicopters, now there's a thought?
I feel CSAR is destined to become a secondary role for SH, whilst the UK shores are protected by the Coastguard... or maybe RNLI helicopters, now there's a thought?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the original and continued point of mil SAR was to recover FJ mates when they parted company with the jet. As we all know that tasking is <1% of 1% of the jobs (thankfully).
Technically isn't mil SAR meant to be deployable in times of crisis? Not that I can recall such an event. I guess anyone's deployable if reqd.
Whilst the SH mates are definitely better placed for the CSAR role, the yellow/ red & grey fleet do get a fantastic range of jobs which the aircrew would never find elsewhere. That's experience for the mil you literally could keep buying if you kept us going. Not to mention, as stated by 4F above, the PR is always good.
Can't remember the last time a misinformed journo dissed any SAR crew for abusing the casualty! (That could well be another thread!)
Technically isn't mil SAR meant to be deployable in times of crisis? Not that I can recall such an event. I guess anyone's deployable if reqd.
Whilst the SH mates are definitely better placed for the CSAR role, the yellow/ red & grey fleet do get a fantastic range of jobs which the aircrew would never find elsewhere. That's experience for the mil you literally could keep buying if you kept us going. Not to mention, as stated by 4F above, the PR is always good.
Can't remember the last time a misinformed journo dissed any SAR crew for abusing the casualty! (That could well be another thread!)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, the Junglie bloke that wrote (copied from the Yanks) the JPR doctrine couldn't find his own @rse with both hands.
Not entirely his fault, but IMHO we are trying to match the US way of doing things without the suitable assets just to, in theory, be interoperable. The chances of the US letting us anywhere near one of their operations is quite likely zero.
I reckon we should do it like USMC Trap.
The simple fact is that JPR and SAR bear no relation to each other, otherwise 771 and Crab sqns would be the guys doing it!
Not entirely his fault, but IMHO we are trying to match the US way of doing things without the suitable assets just to, in theory, be interoperable. The chances of the US letting us anywhere near one of their operations is quite likely zero.
I reckon we should do it like USMC Trap.
The simple fact is that JPR and SAR bear no relation to each other, otherwise 771 and Crab sqns would be the guys doing it!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not meant as an inter-service dig but the RN SAR force is totally coherent with the front line reqt. RN SAR crews are front line crews from the SK/Mer/Lynx world on a respite tour. The skillsets are directly transferrable and embarked crews are at notice for SAR wherever they are in the world - and have been used on an all too regular basis.
Regrettably (and this is not a dig) the RAF SAR Force is a stand alone organisation with no war/front line role. With the exception of a loss of PR civilianisation of this Force would make little difference to MOD.
Regrettably (and this is not a dig) the RAF SAR Force is a stand alone organisation with no war/front line role. With the exception of a loss of PR civilianisation of this Force would make little difference to MOD.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Worth bearing in mind that the RN SAR force has its roots in the support of FW carrier aviation, which we are promised will return in about 20XX. The RN does therefore need to maintain skills in SAR in order to be able to expand (a rare word!) capacity when JSF goes to sea.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the MOD SAR force is technically deployable I think. But concur that the RN rotates the crews way more than the light blue.
One of the fundamental difficulties for the civ's (I standby to be corrected here...) is that they remain bound by whatever limits the MCA or whoever sets them. Whereas a mil crew can keep going at the a/c cdr's discretion with no theoretical limit, merely judgment as when to say "no". Not that the civ's would not have the cojones to keep going (they're mostly ex-mil anyway) but for them the line is the line. Mainly I'm talking about actually getting to the scene, which is often the hardest bit.
Last autumn a mil crew had a bugger of a time getting to a family of 8 who were literally being washed away on a river island (their transit van already had). The wx was diabolical but by climbing over the trees when necessary, hover taxiing down the roads etc, they got there and pulled them off, in the nick of time when things were looking v.grim.
How did the crew justify it? Because it's operational flying which allows a/c cdrs to modify the rules if it's in the national/service interest.
How can such rules be applied to a civ crew? Bristows/CHC or whoever have a ton of money invested in their cabs - they won't allow them to fly "limitless".
Perhaps the answer is for the MOD to "parent" all SAR and take the budget that would have been allocated to the MCA post SAR(H). This is of course a great theory but the reality is still likely to end up way different I'm afraid.
One of the fundamental difficulties for the civ's (I standby to be corrected here...) is that they remain bound by whatever limits the MCA or whoever sets them. Whereas a mil crew can keep going at the a/c cdr's discretion with no theoretical limit, merely judgment as when to say "no". Not that the civ's would not have the cojones to keep going (they're mostly ex-mil anyway) but for them the line is the line. Mainly I'm talking about actually getting to the scene, which is often the hardest bit.
Last autumn a mil crew had a bugger of a time getting to a family of 8 who were literally being washed away on a river island (their transit van already had). The wx was diabolical but by climbing over the trees when necessary, hover taxiing down the roads etc, they got there and pulled them off, in the nick of time when things were looking v.grim.
How did the crew justify it? Because it's operational flying which allows a/c cdrs to modify the rules if it's in the national/service interest.
How can such rules be applied to a civ crew? Bristows/CHC or whoever have a ton of money invested in their cabs - they won't allow them to fly "limitless".
Perhaps the answer is for the MOD to "parent" all SAR and take the budget that would have been allocated to the MCA post SAR(H). This is of course a great theory but the reality is still likely to end up way different I'm afraid.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
What is there to stop the Mil from turning over the crewing of SAR to FTRS and the maintainance to a civilian contractor?
Best of all worlds or worst of all worlds?
Best of all worlds or worst of all worlds?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beefer,
The point is not one of rotation of crews it is that ALL RN rotary crews are SAR capable and on standby when embarked.
Re "theoretical" deployability of the UK SAR Force - the point here is that there is no deployable role for the RAF SAR Force, the RN SAR a/c can and do deploy to the CVS for SAR/HDS duties.
Re Civ SAR - there is no reason why the CAA could not clear Civ SAR to the same limits as the current Mil SAR to allow overland SAR - the police are already NVG cleared etc.
The point is not one of rotation of crews it is that ALL RN rotary crews are SAR capable and on standby when embarked.
Re "theoretical" deployability of the UK SAR Force - the point here is that there is no deployable role for the RAF SAR Force, the RN SAR a/c can and do deploy to the CVS for SAR/HDS duties.
Re Civ SAR - there is no reason why the CAA could not clear Civ SAR to the same limits as the current Mil SAR to allow overland SAR - the police are already NVG cleared etc.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bismark,
Stretching the point a bit to say all RN crews are SAR capable. Junglies will have a go at night if they are allowed, but not really SAR capable at sea.
Lynx ditto at night
Stretching the point a bit to say all RN crews are SAR capable. Junglies will have a go at night if they are allowed, but not really SAR capable at sea.
Lynx ditto at night
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concur Tourist's comments re all RN SAR capable - all helo crews can have a go at rescuing someone, the RN are SAR at sea on AL60 or as reqd because they're the only SAR asset in the middle of the oggin. Likewise the AAC do similar in Belize etc; not the same as a dedicated, worked up SAR crew with appropriate kit.
Droopystop - didn't know that - ta. Hopefully the crew wouldn't feel any commercial pressure to stop before they felt they'd actually hit the limit of the a/c + crew, especially since they've mainly been on mil side of the fence.
Airborne artist's idea has merit I think - as ever I guess money will drive the issues.
But, what will happen if/when all SAR is civ and all the ex-mil SAR types have withered on the vine? I guess the civ's will need to grow their own experience from within - however, my gut tells me the accident rate is bound to go up at that point. It's been a long running debate on another thread about the amount of hours the mil/civs get for training. The accidents will probably come from the crew getting out of their depth when inevitably they act with the casualty's best interests at heart. Alternatively they might call it a day (night?) when a mil crew (or civ of old) could have found the way to skin the cat.
Is there a thoroughbred civvy SAR driver out there who can advise on how their operation is going?
Any SAR service is better than none of course. But wouldn't it be ironic if some civil servant who's signed off to kill mil SAR was the bloke left on the side of mountain because of the reasons above?
Perhaps we've shot ourselves in the foot by not taking such decision makers out on a few more dark and scary nights (pref. a real job) - they might see it differently.
Any SABR/SAR(H) experts who could enlighten us on the gen rationale behind the decisions?
Droopystop - didn't know that - ta. Hopefully the crew wouldn't feel any commercial pressure to stop before they felt they'd actually hit the limit of the a/c + crew, especially since they've mainly been on mil side of the fence.
Airborne artist's idea has merit I think - as ever I guess money will drive the issues.
But, what will happen if/when all SAR is civ and all the ex-mil SAR types have withered on the vine? I guess the civ's will need to grow their own experience from within - however, my gut tells me the accident rate is bound to go up at that point. It's been a long running debate on another thread about the amount of hours the mil/civs get for training. The accidents will probably come from the crew getting out of their depth when inevitably they act with the casualty's best interests at heart. Alternatively they might call it a day (night?) when a mil crew (or civ of old) could have found the way to skin the cat.
Is there a thoroughbred civvy SAR driver out there who can advise on how their operation is going?
Any SAR service is better than none of course. But wouldn't it be ironic if some civil servant who's signed off to kill mil SAR was the bloke left on the side of mountain because of the reasons above?
Perhaps we've shot ourselves in the foot by not taking such decision makers out on a few more dark and scary nights (pref. a real job) - they might see it differently.
Any SABR/SAR(H) experts who could enlighten us on the gen rationale behind the decisions?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jungly
Can't disagree with you over the pound being king.
There's probably a culture of legacy thinking here (of which I'm still guilty). Whereby people are used to a very high standard of SAR and presume that's the base level required. In reality as I said above, any service is better than none, and if the jobs are attacked safely and most casualities are dealt with then that is the base level.
However.....if we paired everything down to the leanest possible it would make for a dull existence, grossly limit the respite tours for those overworked Front Liners and I suspect would rather take the shine off the military flying machine in that we do SAR pretty well and there are tangible benefits to MOD associated with it. Viewed purely as a PR effort it is indeed expensive but it has other roles than SAR - namely civil aid, homeland defence, nuclear accident support (deep joy!) etc. All stuff that might prove a bit geographically tricky for the SH mates if they're all deployed East of Suez and certainly not going to be in any MCA/civvy company contract.
A subjective view of course, you can always get choppers from somewhere to fill the gaps.
SB
Can't disagree with you over the pound being king.
There's probably a culture of legacy thinking here (of which I'm still guilty). Whereby people are used to a very high standard of SAR and presume that's the base level required. In reality as I said above, any service is better than none, and if the jobs are attacked safely and most casualities are dealt with then that is the base level.
However.....if we paired everything down to the leanest possible it would make for a dull existence, grossly limit the respite tours for those overworked Front Liners and I suspect would rather take the shine off the military flying machine in that we do SAR pretty well and there are tangible benefits to MOD associated with it. Viewed purely as a PR effort it is indeed expensive but it has other roles than SAR - namely civil aid, homeland defence, nuclear accident support (deep joy!) etc. All stuff that might prove a bit geographically tricky for the SH mates if they're all deployed East of Suez and certainly not going to be in any MCA/civvy company contract.
A subjective view of course, you can always get choppers from somewhere to fill the gaps.
SB
Gentleman Aviator
I still remain to be convinced that providing a comparable service by civilians would be cheaper.
I was in MoD a few years ago when SAR civilianisation was raised (as it regularly is). Much of the financial justification was made by comparisons with the then-new DHFS, and it was amazingly difficult to convince Sir Humphrey and his gang that putting 24 Squirrels on the line at one base 9-5 five days a week was a touche different from putting 2 Sea Kings (or equivalent) on line 24/7/365 in penny packets at a many different locations ....
That said, it will probably happen as "the pound is king". Cynical moi predicts the following:
1. Privatisation proceeds on flawed Investment Appraisal.
2. "No more resources available" when it is discovered that military system cannot be replicated.
3. Service provided cut somehow - probably closing flights/extending reaction times - to fit what Sir Humphrey wants to spend.
Remember .... you heard it here first......
I was in MoD a few years ago when SAR civilianisation was raised (as it regularly is). Much of the financial justification was made by comparisons with the then-new DHFS, and it was amazingly difficult to convince Sir Humphrey and his gang that putting 24 Squirrels on the line at one base 9-5 five days a week was a touche different from putting 2 Sea Kings (or equivalent) on line 24/7/365 in penny packets at a many different locations ....
That said, it will probably happen as "the pound is king". Cynical moi predicts the following:
1. Privatisation proceeds on flawed Investment Appraisal.
2. "No more resources available" when it is discovered that military system cannot be replicated.
3. Service provided cut somehow - probably closing flights/extending reaction times - to fit what Sir Humphrey wants to spend.
Remember .... you heard it here first......