Reported lack of SAR cover
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Grantham, UK
Age: 85
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reported lack of SAR cover
What was that I heard on Radio 4 this morning? Something about the whole of the Yorkshire/Lincolnshire coast being without SAR cover because there wasn't one helicopter serviceable? A named Sqn Ldr came on line and I might have misheard, but he seemed to imply there were times when the whole of 202 Sqn was U/S simultaneously - and not for just a few moments either!
For the sake of all those youngsters on flying training from Cranwell etc., please will someone tell me it isn't so.
For the sake of all those youngsters on flying training from Cranwell etc., please will someone tell me it isn't so.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Grantham, UK
Age: 85
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that BBC link, AIDU. Always best to see the facts spelled out. Just another example of the endless battle to keep ageing aircraft in the air - no change there then!
Realising I now put the worst interpretation on each doom and gloom snippet I hear is just as disturbing! I'm sure we could all do with a little light relief.
Realising I now put the worst interpretation on each doom and gloom snippet I hear is just as disturbing! I'm sure we could all do with a little light relief.
I was impressed last Wednesday morning, returning from Zeebrugge on the ferry Pride of York, woken at 06:00, position just off Cleethorpes (or Donna 
) by loud Sea King type noise just outside my cabin window, drew back curtains and observed a perfect medevac, all done in the dark with minimum of fuss, hat off guys 
) by loud Sea King type noise just outside my cabin window, drew back curtains and observed a perfect medevac, all done in the dark with minimum of fuss, hat off guys
Last edited by OwnNav; 7th Nov 2007 at 20:15.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Behind the wire.
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
true
this is not unheard of but in the defence of 202 it is very rare. I've known nights recently when we've been going flying and recieved a call saying there would be no SAR cover. Makes being a couple of hundred miles out of the North Sea in the dark slightly more uncomfortable.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Top floor, b@stards moved me. NO LONGER watchin the circuit
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Having watched the whole programme on BBC1 last night I was impressed by the Grp Capt's ability to deflect questions. (politician in the making?) Is he correct that ALL major components are changed during life cycle servicings ? When questioned on electrical looms he suggested that the aircraft is stripped back to bare bones and EVERYTHING is replaced. IE They become new aircraft. Any one "in the know" willing to expand on this...... thanks.
HHT
HHT
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Top floor, b@stards moved me. NO LONGER watchin the circuit
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Spacer... so the Gp Capt was telling the truth after all... phew, thank goodness for that... the old girls should keep going forever then, following this logic... 
pink plastic pigs turning finals
HHT
pink plastic pigs turning finalsHHT
HH2 - the stripping back to bare bones is what used to happen in HMF but now DARA are involved they don't have the time or the manpower to do anything like such a thorough job.
Lossie got one today from them that was U/s on arrival with a multitude of snags. It's not the aircraft that is the problem, it's the spares support (or lack of it) and the move towards civilianisation that cause most of the angst.
My belief is that we should immediately about turn and keep military engineers maintaining our aircraft.
Lossie got one today from them that was U/s on arrival with a multitude of snags. It's not the aircraft that is the problem, it's the spares support (or lack of it) and the move towards civilianisation that cause most of the angst.
My belief is that we should immediately about turn and keep military engineers maintaining our aircraft.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Military SAR Engineers
Given the huge amount of manpower used by the military SAR engineers to support a quite small number of ac I fear that the engineers are part of the problem rather than the solution. I know their are plenty of arguments about training and secondary duties etc but with 30 guys to look after 2 ac how bad can it be for the engineers. In the modern age this sort of manning simply costs too much and in a non warfighting part of the military is simply unsustainable. I am afraid Crab that plenty of civilian ac fly around safely and well looked after by civilian engineers who are inevitably far fewer in number than their military counterparts.
The military aircrew have regularly shown themselves to have high operational standards and could favourably match themselves against any comparable organisation. Is the same really true on the engineering front.
The military aircrew have regularly shown themselves to have high operational standards and could favourably match themselves against any comparable organisation. Is the same really true on the engineering front.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: england
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Artificial Horizon,
with all due respect have you got a clue what you are talking about?.......The Engineering in the RAF is going down the pan as it is due to lack of manpower, we are lucky to see a shift with 60% manning at the best of times, considering that SAR is a warfighting part of the mil, who do you think goes and gets downed aircrew in times of war? Then add an absolutly tragic supply system, crumbling infrastructure, aging aircraft that are no doubt very maintainance intensive, and you have your answer.....
The civilian contractors that are spreading through the RAF like wildfire are good guys, but again it destroyes the RAF skill base to the point service personel are merely used to kick the tyres and light the fires, which in the long run is disasterous for long term engineering skill and quality of workmanship.
Add to that leave, dets, dutys,sickies etc etc you will find your 30 lazy engineers who loaf around the T-bar is more like 10-15 who have plenty to keep them on thier toes..... It is all very well having a "lean" system, but who starves first in times of crisis, the fat bloke with his extra reserves or the skinny wiaf who is parred to the bone?
Lose manpower lose capability, simple.
The RAF ship is not so much sinking as being drilled and filled with water by those who captin her
with all due respect have you got a clue what you are talking about?
.......The Engineering in the RAF is going down the pan as it is due to lack of manpower, we are lucky to see a shift with 60% manning at the best of times, considering that SAR is a warfighting part of the mil, who do you think goes and gets downed aircrew in times of war? Then add an absolutly tragic supply system, crumbling infrastructure, aging aircraft that are no doubt very maintainance intensive, and you have your answer..... The civilian contractors that are spreading through the RAF like wildfire are good guys, but again it destroyes the RAF skill base to the point service personel are merely used to kick the tyres and light the fires, which in the long run is disasterous for long term engineering skill and quality of workmanship.
Add to that leave, dets, dutys,sickies etc etc you will find your 30 lazy engineers who loaf around the T-bar is more like 10-15 who have plenty to keep them on thier toes.
.... It is all very well having a "lean" system, but who starves first in times of crisis, the fat bloke with his extra reserves or the skinny wiaf who is parred to the bone? Lose manpower lose capability, simple.
The RAF ship is not so much sinking as being drilled and filled with water by those who captin her
If its any consolation the same arguments are happening in the civilian world.
Schreiner airways used to spend about 4 million guilders (£500,000???) carrying out a 12 week G check on a Dauphin including a back to bare metal respray.
End result a nearly new aircraft and very good in service reliability.
Helikopter service used to do a similar job on their S61's. The result was a 30 year old aircraft that you could eat your dinner off.
Other operators did and do take a minimalist approach to heavy maintenance.
End result crap in service reliabilty.
The engineers hate this low cost maintenance because it just dumps problems on to the line operation.
In the case of the RAF Seakings the problem is not the age of the aircraft but the spares support and the quality of heavy maintenance.
Without having seen the program, I am surprised that a senior RAF officer is blaming the age of the aircraft. Maybe he just wants some new toys to play with!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schreiner airways used to spend about 4 million guilders (£500,000???) carrying out a 12 week G check on a Dauphin including a back to bare metal respray.
End result a nearly new aircraft and very good in service reliability.
Helikopter service used to do a similar job on their S61's. The result was a 30 year old aircraft that you could eat your dinner off.
Other operators did and do take a minimalist approach to heavy maintenance.
End result crap in service reliabilty.
The engineers hate this low cost maintenance because it just dumps problems on to the line operation.
In the case of the RAF Seakings the problem is not the age of the aircraft but the spares support and the quality of heavy maintenance.
Without having seen the program, I am surprised that a senior RAF officer is blaming the age of the aircraft. Maybe he just wants some new toys to play with!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Virtually anywhere!
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ex-202 ground bod, I dont remember having 30 groundcrew on a shift! We had 6 a shift plus 2 SNCO's on days. It may of course have changed since I de-mobbed! Being offstae (None servicable) Did happen but was relativly rare! I know our local civvy counterparts ran with much less manpower, but they didn't cover 24/7 on dets, or guard, etc.....
Good job being done on all sides I say
Good job being done on all sides I say
Gentleman Aviator
AH & hedgester
You're probably both right about numbers of gingerbeers but you ain't comparing apples with apples.
Remember these flights work 24/7/365, so any number of people you have you can traditionally divide by 5 - ie, if you want to fill a position 24/7 you need 5 people to allow for shifts, leave sickness etc etc.
And of course this rule of thumb assumes lots of spares, full establishments, and no OOA .............
You're probably both right about numbers of gingerbeers but you ain't comparing apples with apples.
Remember these flights work 24/7/365, so any number of people you have you can traditionally divide by 5 - ie, if you want to fill a position 24/7 you need 5 people to allow for shifts, leave sickness etc etc.
And of course this rule of thumb assumes lots of spares, full establishments, and no OOA .............
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warfighting SAR?
Kengineer-130 wrote:
"...considering that SAR is a warfighting part of the mil, who do you think goes and gets downed aircrew in times of war?"
hmmm. Not quite convinced about that
. Indeed I have always struggled to see how the SAR Force maintain this justification. There appears to be very little cross pollination into the deployable rotary forces. Downed crew most likely to be picked up by ground troops or a dedicated (Yank 
) package.
I do however think that there is more than sufficient justification for Mil SAR based on the good work done around the British Isles.
"...considering that SAR is a warfighting part of the mil, who do you think goes and gets downed aircrew in times of war?"
hmmm. Not quite convinced about that
. Indeed I have always struggled to see how the SAR Force maintain this justification. There appears to be very little cross pollination into the deployable rotary forces. Downed crew most likely to be picked up by ground troops or a dedicated (Yank ) package.I do however think that there is more than sufficient justification for Mil SAR based on the good work done around the British Isles.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SCOTLAND
Age: 51
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should put the artificial horizon guy in a room with my missus and and let him tell her that RAF engineers are not up to it! especially after a 36 hour shift and about 4 people on that shift. Would you see civvy engineers doing OP FRESCO, being called back off leave/standown etc?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shift Manpower
Kengineer.
When you refer to the SAR Force rescuing people in war I presume you are referring to the prospect of a general war across europe. A scarely credible scenario. During the conflicts of the last 20 years the RAF SAR Force has not taken part except in fringe positions. You also say that high engineering numbers are required to cover leave and sickies. Equally true of your civilian couterparts. I fully accept that dets and OOA raise the establishment requirement but not to the level which exists.
Hedgster.
When I said 30 engineers to look after 2 ac I meant per unit not per shift. That is still a very generous allowance. Bristow, CHC and Bond have all operated 24/7 units. How many engineers do they employ on each unit.
I fully support the Militay SAR Units. Over the years they have done fantastic work and still do. They can continue to operate under the military umbrella as part of a Force for Good position. They still possess capabilities not open to their civil counterparts such as Low Level on NVG. However unpalatable it may be these units nonetheless will have to compete on a value for money basis. Note I say VALUE not COST before someone jumps down my neck about using the cheapest option.
When you refer to the SAR Force rescuing people in war I presume you are referring to the prospect of a general war across europe. A scarely credible scenario. During the conflicts of the last 20 years the RAF SAR Force has not taken part except in fringe positions. You also say that high engineering numbers are required to cover leave and sickies. Equally true of your civilian couterparts. I fully accept that dets and OOA raise the establishment requirement but not to the level which exists.
Hedgster.
When I said 30 engineers to look after 2 ac I meant per unit not per shift. That is still a very generous allowance. Bristow, CHC and Bond have all operated 24/7 units. How many engineers do they employ on each unit.
I fully support the Militay SAR Units. Over the years they have done fantastic work and still do. They can continue to operate under the military umbrella as part of a Force for Good position. They still possess capabilities not open to their civil counterparts such as Low Level on NVG. However unpalatable it may be these units nonetheless will have to compete on a value for money basis. Note I say VALUE not COST before someone jumps down my neck about using the cheapest option.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: middleofnowhere
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it could work
Mil SAR is totally feasible, but it would take more crews, more aircraft and more money....... how likely is any of that?
SH mates are fully capable of the Mil SAR role, with a bit of extra training and the aircraft would need a few mods to bring it up to the right spec.
SAR mates are fully capable of the Mil SAR role, with a bit of extra training and the aircraft would need a full defence suite fitting. (and maybe some different paint....)
(Having spent time on both disciplines, I think I'm qualified to comment)
Haven't SH crews got enough on their plate already, to take on the extra commitment?
SAR is maintaining 24/7/365 UK cover, but only just. (as far as manning goes)
Add the fact that:
A percentage of SH think the SAR force are a bunch of prima donnas, who have got an easy life.
A percentage of the SAR force thinks they are bitter and twisted, because they failed selection.
IS there a solution?
Mil SAR needs doing properly or not at all.
SH mates are fully capable of the Mil SAR role, with a bit of extra training and the aircraft would need a few mods to bring it up to the right spec.
SAR mates are fully capable of the Mil SAR role, with a bit of extra training and the aircraft would need a full defence suite fitting. (and maybe some different paint....)
(Having spent time on both disciplines, I think I'm qualified to comment)
Haven't SH crews got enough on their plate already, to take on the extra commitment?
SAR is maintaining 24/7/365 UK cover, but only just. (as far as manning goes)
Add the fact that:
A percentage of SH think the SAR force are a bunch of prima donnas, who have got an easy life.
A percentage of the SAR force thinks they are bitter and twisted, because they failed selection.
IS there a solution?
Mil SAR needs doing properly or not at all.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Monde
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DANGER! DANGER! Don't mention the words "chopped at SARTU" around Shawbury/Benson/Odiham etc You might suddenly see a few of the guys disappearing into their newspapers! Bring back Ming!