Sold out - SAR force to be privatised
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Way up in the clouds
Age: 42
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Short-termism at its finest!
'Could be the last' - We'd rather have the Super Puma/Cougar, but other than that a good idea.
Also, a point that no-one has raised yet - Bristows etc provide a very competent and effective SAR cover in their AORs. HOWEVER, the overriding majority of their crews, both front- and rear-end, come from a military SAR background. I would meekly suggest that if we privatise mil SAR, in 5-10 years time when the supply of ex-mil SAR crews dries up you will suddenly see the cost of the contract leap up as they have to pay for a massively increased training programme et al. Another fine example of the Birtish political system's inability to see aywhere beyond the next General Election.
The removal of the britmil pipe-and-slippers brigade, much as we love to banter them, would also lead to a further loss of expertise in the basic SAR techniques at the front-line as the cross-pollenisation between SAR and SH would obviously cease. But on the plus side it would remove some of the more embarassing elements of the RAF aircrew fraternity that seem to get squirrelled away at SARTU. So maybe it is worth it after all
Also, a point that no-one has raised yet - Bristows etc provide a very competent and effective SAR cover in their AORs. HOWEVER, the overriding majority of their crews, both front- and rear-end, come from a military SAR background. I would meekly suggest that if we privatise mil SAR, in 5-10 years time when the supply of ex-mil SAR crews dries up you will suddenly see the cost of the contract leap up as they have to pay for a massively increased training programme et al. Another fine example of the Birtish political system's inability to see aywhere beyond the next General Election.
The removal of the britmil pipe-and-slippers brigade, much as we love to banter them, would also lead to a further loss of expertise in the basic SAR techniques at the front-line as the cross-pollenisation between SAR and SH would obviously cease. But on the plus side it would remove some of the more embarassing elements of the RAF aircrew fraternity that seem to get squirrelled away at SARTU. So maybe it is worth it after all
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bristows on a carrier?
As has been proved numerous times landing and taking off from a carrier can be very dangerous. SAR cover on carriers is provided by 771 NAS, who also do civi rescue in Cornwall. With new carriers (hopefully) and new ship based FJs (hopefully) would Bristows or another civi operator be prepared to provide the same service? Or should we invest in more SAR training for the Merlin crews? In which case why can't Merlin do the same for the UK coastline as well? IMHO a Merlin with a winch should be able to conduct a rescue as long as the crew are properly trained in the techniques. Happy to be corrected as SAR is not my area of expertise.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: midlands
Age: 59
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For Goodness sake!
Do you all believe everything you read in the press!
As far as I am aware we intend to keep military crews in SAR. Numbers TBD. The infrastructure will be civilian provided as will the ac - it works elsewhere so why not here. The ac may be on the military register or off it. Jungly mentions he worked in the IPT which incidentatly, is a run from the military side of the house with MCA partnership. If this was a total civilianisation with ZERO military input then we wouldn't have an IPT at all but a 'project' within the DTi [or whatever its called these days!].
Calm down everyone, no one is selling anything down the swanny. In fact this could be the best thing to happen to mil SAR for a long time - new investment with skills retained for battlefield use. What could be better.
Surely, this does all that we want and captures almost all the points previously raised?
As far as I am aware we intend to keep military crews in SAR. Numbers TBD. The infrastructure will be civilian provided as will the ac - it works elsewhere so why not here. The ac may be on the military register or off it. Jungly mentions he worked in the IPT which incidentatly, is a run from the military side of the house with MCA partnership. If this was a total civilianisation with ZERO military input then we wouldn't have an IPT at all but a 'project' within the DTi [or whatever its called these days!].
Calm down everyone, no one is selling anything down the swanny. In fact this could be the best thing to happen to mil SAR for a long time - new investment with skills retained for battlefield use. What could be better.
Surely, this does all that we want and captures almost all the points previously raised?
Harrogate,
Just imagine what life would be like if you got all the government you pay for?
Far better they waste it on pork barrel projects rather than government I would suggest.
That is the only reason we have not had a second American Revolution over taxes.
Just imagine what life would be like if you got all the government you pay for?
Far better they waste it on pork barrel projects rather than government I would suggest.
That is the only reason we have not had a second American Revolution over taxes.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
Harrogate,
Just imagine what life would be like if you got all the government you pay for?
Far better they waste it on pork barrel projects rather than government I would suggest.
That is the only reason we have not had a second American Revolution over taxes.
Just imagine what life would be like if you got all the government you pay for?
Far better they waste it on pork barrel projects rather than government I would suggest.
That is the only reason we have not had a second American Revolution over taxes.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a PPL who flies regulary around the coasts, I have been watching this thread with some interest
I have had experience of 'outsourcing' on the grounds that the service should concentrate on its core function - very much in the way this proposal is being sold.
Where this has happened in my old business, there was a massive decline in standards on both the contracted-out and retained services
1) the contractor had an SLA and anything in addition to that was charged for at exorbitant prices. Similarly they made a massive profit on variations cos the civil servants got the figures wrong
2) the retained service suffered, as they lost a lot of the day-to-day low-level functions so training was reduced.
Finally, the bean-counters got hacked off with staff waiting around, seemingly doing nothing, they cut the budget again
In this case the CSAR is a great facility, gives the Great British Public a good feeling and advertises that you are there for us. From my perspective, having already lost some SAR facilities locally, I would hope that your bosses put up a fight
I have had experience of 'outsourcing' on the grounds that the service should concentrate on its core function - very much in the way this proposal is being sold.
Where this has happened in my old business, there was a massive decline in standards on both the contracted-out and retained services
1) the contractor had an SLA and anything in addition to that was charged for at exorbitant prices. Similarly they made a massive profit on variations cos the civil servants got the figures wrong
2) the retained service suffered, as they lost a lot of the day-to-day low-level functions so training was reduced.
Finally, the bean-counters got hacked off with staff waiting around, seemingly doing nothing, they cut the budget again
In this case the CSAR is a great facility, gives the Great British Public a good feeling and advertises that you are there for us. From my perspective, having already lost some SAR facilities locally, I would hope that your bosses put up a fight
What a load of rubbish.
I must admit I haven't seen the article but I understand there are loads of errors in it and it would appear that very little research had been done. As SARREMF says, don't believe everything you read in the papers.
Not true. One of the bidders for the contract will be Westland and one of their available platforms is the Merlin which they are keen to push for obvious reasons. However, it is expensive and not ideally suited to short range SAR (but would be OK for long range).
Allowing the military to bid for the contract would not work. Call me a cynic but the money comes from a different budget. Therefore the cost to the MOD for a civilian aircraft is nothing. The military could not bid lower than that!!
It is my understanding that the proportion of Military to Civilian crews will remain the same, although I would not guarantee it. Civilian engineering was announced ages ago but has been delayed, and the contract for a Sea King replacement has also been openly discussed. None of this is news.
p.s. Just because SAR crews don't deploy very often, it does not mean they are not working bloody hard. Quality of life is good but it is no free ride. If you calculate the number of 24 hr shifts carried out by the average 'battle-dodger' it works out to be in excess of 4 months away from home every year (not including FI/Basra etc for those involved). Admittedly the longest, single, det is likely to be the annual (or more frequent for some) 6 weeks in FI.
I must admit I haven't seen the article but I understand there are loads of errors in it and it would appear that very little research had been done. As SARREMF says, don't believe everything you read in the papers.
Bottom line is that H.M government doesn't want to pay for Merlin etc to replace the Sea King.
Allowing the military to bid for the contract would not work. Call me a cynic but the money comes from a different budget. Therefore the cost to the MOD for a civilian aircraft is nothing. The military could not bid lower than that!!
It is my understanding that the proportion of Military to Civilian crews will remain the same, although I would not guarantee it. Civilian engineering was announced ages ago but has been delayed, and the contract for a Sea King replacement has also been openly discussed. None of this is news.
p.s. Just because SAR crews don't deploy very often, it does not mean they are not working bloody hard. Quality of life is good but it is no free ride. If you calculate the number of 24 hr shifts carried out by the average 'battle-dodger' it works out to be in excess of 4 months away from home every year (not including FI/Basra etc for those involved). Admittedly the longest, single, det is likely to be the annual (or more frequent for some) 6 weeks in FI.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SAR Bloke
and not ideally suited to short range SAR (but would be OK for long range).
TOG
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Therefore the cost to the MOD for a civilian aircraft is nothing.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Canadians seem to be doing OK using their version of the Merlin for SAR.
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equ.../history_e.asp
I'm sure Westland would jump at the chance to bulid a few more for UK use.
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equ.../history_e.asp
I'm sure Westland would jump at the chance to bulid a few more for UK use.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure it would!
If a public body were to procure a new SAR helicopter, I'm sure it would be tempted to support British industry - at whatever the cost to the taxpayer!
However, a private company might look elsewhere for cheaper, but just as capable, solutions that offer better value for money.
If a public body were to procure a new SAR helicopter, I'm sure it would be tempted to support British industry - at whatever the cost to the taxpayer!
However, a private company might look elsewhere for cheaper, but just as capable, solutions that offer better value for money.
That depends on what link you look at.
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...or+cracks.html
I guess the Merlin could be used for short range but it is not ideal. It is big and has a fairly fierce downwash. These arguments against change were also used when the Sea King replaced the Wessex but there is a limit to what can be coped with. I also understand that it's design causes it to be little tricky in turbulent air which may cause difficulties in the mountains in 50kt+ winds. However I haven't flown it so don't know about this. I will get to see one tomorrow so will ask the pilot how it copes. With regard to the Mk's available, I don't know a lot about them but the RAF version does not have a radar so would be unsuitable.
Incidentally, I believe Westland may agree and understand they may offer a mixed fleet solution including Merlins and Agusta 139's (or similar).
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...or+cracks.html
I guess the Merlin could be used for short range but it is not ideal. It is big and has a fairly fierce downwash. These arguments against change were also used when the Sea King replaced the Wessex but there is a limit to what can be coped with. I also understand that it's design causes it to be little tricky in turbulent air which may cause difficulties in the mountains in 50kt+ winds. However I haven't flown it so don't know about this. I will get to see one tomorrow so will ask the pilot how it copes. With regard to the Mk's available, I don't know a lot about them but the RAF version does not have a radar so would be unsuitable.
Incidentally, I believe Westland may agree and understand they may offer a mixed fleet solution including Merlins and Agusta 139's (or similar).
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SE490618
Age: 64
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't flown the Merlin (sadly) and therefore feel unable to comment. But, I have flown the Wessex and Seaking on SAR flights and feel that the Merlin would be just too big to conduct SAR operations around our coastline.
Would a Merlin be able to hover over a Yacht? A Dingy? An Inshore LB ?
Would a Merlin be able to conduct Cliff winching? Would a Merlin have been OK to operate inside the confines of the Valley at Boscastle? Anyone know the answers?
Would a Merlin be able to hover over a Yacht? A Dingy? An Inshore LB ?
Would a Merlin be able to conduct Cliff winching? Would a Merlin have been OK to operate inside the confines of the Valley at Boscastle? Anyone know the answers?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Anywhere there's ships and aircraft available
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHY IS THIS NEWS!!!
This whole issue has been on the streets both in and out of the MoD for at least 18 months including the fact that there will be military aircrew in the system. I don't quite understand the bleating here since I know all SAR units have been briefed on the surrounding facts.
The fact is we can't afford to pay for a military SAR that seems to do 90% civil rescues (especially the Spainish fisherman 300m out), mean that this is not a MILITARY function especially now a large number of civvy operators can do it.
This would have happened whatever Govt was in power and was under scrutiny under the previous Conservative one.
What would you rather have - SH or SAR.
The fact is we can't afford to pay for a military SAR that seems to do 90% civil rescues (especially the Spainish fisherman 300m out), mean that this is not a MILITARY function especially now a large number of civvy operators can do it.
This would have happened whatever Govt was in power and was under scrutiny under the previous Conservative one.
What would you rather have - SH or SAR.
Originally Posted by jumpjumpjohn
The removal of the britmil pipe-and-slippers brigade, much as we love to banter them, would also lead to a further loss of expertise in the basic SAR techniques at the front-line as the cross-pollenisation between SAR and SH would obviously cease. But on the plus side it would remove some of the more embarassing elements of the RAF aircrew fraternity that seem to get squirrelled away at SARTU. So maybe it is worth it after all
Would it be "cross-pollenisation"?
"squirrelled away" You mean like nuts?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SE490618
Age: 64
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the figures, and they're mind boggling. If you think its worth the PR and training, then all I can say is the hundreds of millions currently spent per anum on RAF SARF would buy you a lot of training and PR.
Last edited by snafu; 20th Apr 2006 at 18:28.
The SARF is already being privatised by the back door anyway; despite sterling effort from Helicopter Maintenance Flight at St Mawgan to improve throughput and productivity, all major servicing will be handed over to DARA at Fleetlands this year. Additionally, all the very dedicated first line engineers who populate the SAR flts fixing the cabs at all hours of the day and night are to be replaced by civilian contractors by the middle of 08. Quite who would be foolish enough to take on the aging Sea King fleet and the ponderous RAF engineering practices and expect to make a profit is beyond me but apparently it is happening. And just to improve matters, the move to calendar servicing and lean maintenance has pushed more of the engineering load on the flights.
The move from St Mawgan (where lots of people want to be) to Valley (where no-one wants to be) is just the icing on the cake when the SARF is already chin deep in uncertainty and change.
As for the cost of the SARF, this has been argued extensively on this forum before and nobody has come up with a way of accurately comparing like with like, yet they always come to the conclusion that civilianisation will be cheaper. You will still be paying for the SAR cover from your taxes and 24 hr SAR cover doesn't come cheap, whoever is the provider.
The move from St Mawgan (where lots of people want to be) to Valley (where no-one wants to be) is just the icing on the cake when the SARF is already chin deep in uncertainty and change.
As for the cost of the SARF, this has been argued extensively on this forum before and nobody has come up with a way of accurately comparing like with like, yet they always come to the conclusion that civilianisation will be cheaper. You will still be paying for the SAR cover from your taxes and 24 hr SAR cover doesn't come cheap, whoever is the provider.