MOD SAR Reducing to 12hrs, Rotating
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Coast
Age: 79
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOD SAR Reducing to 12hrs, Rotating
An MCA statement
Due to current operational commitments, the MOD have stated that as of the. 13th September, cover from Boulmer will be 12 hour only due to flight safety concerns. This will be followed approximately 1 week later by Wattisham reducing to 12 hour cover as well. This will then rotate around the country as crews deploy and return. A Mitigation Plan is being developed. Further information will be promulgated when it is received.
Any press enquiries should should be directed to the RAF SAR Force.
Sad but I suppose inevitable, but doesn't indicate whether this is both RAF & RN. Trying to count when it's crabs turn.
spr
Due to current operational commitments, the MOD have stated that as of the. 13th September, cover from Boulmer will be 12 hour only due to flight safety concerns. This will be followed approximately 1 week later by Wattisham reducing to 12 hour cover as well. This will then rotate around the country as crews deploy and return. A Mitigation Plan is being developed. Further information will be promulgated when it is received.
Any press enquiries should should be directed to the RAF SAR Force.
Sad but I suppose inevitable, but doesn't indicate whether this is both RAF & RN. Trying to count when it's crabs turn.
spr
Is this real, or is it to establish something that couldn't be done even under the military 'Gold Standard', 'money-no-object' service, and that will therefore be accepted when it continues under the shabby privatised nonsense that follows?
Would standing down each flight from 24 hour ops for one week in 12 help the winning PFI to reduce the number of aircraft it provides, effectively providing a greater 'servicing break' with a reduced need for spare aircraft?
Cynical, moi?
Would standing down each flight from 24 hour ops for one week in 12 help the winning PFI to reduce the number of aircraft it provides, effectively providing a greater 'servicing break' with a reduced need for spare aircraft?
Cynical, moi?
I understand what you're saying vec but be careful with your words - your statement would suggest that the RN have a surplus of both manpower and airframes required to undertake the task they (the RN) are currently mandated to do. A bean counter could take that as suggesting you have 'surplus' or 'fat' in the system and therefore offer it up as "an efficiency measure". Whether that "savings" would be transferred elsewhere in the RN is another matter (or indeed to the RAF ....
...... but of course they would then spend it on the FJ force
)
As an aside is the SAR force considered joint in any form (as with Harrier and most rotary) or are they very much two seperate elements with two different tails and supporting heqadquarters etc? Not fishing, just curious!
...... but of course they would then spend it on the FJ force
)As an aside is the SAR force considered joint in any form (as with Harrier and most rotary) or are they very much two seperate elements with two different tails and supporting heqadquarters etc? Not fishing, just curious!
Well at least someone has made a decision - for a while it looked like we were going to have to run the Falklands plot and 24 hour cover with only 4 crews per flight.
However, the question still remains why we are not being properly manned to meet our task - PMA jumped too early on the bandwagon when downsizing to 4 crews was suggested and now that the EU WTD has to be complied with we are hopelessly undermanned (since we were never fully manned in the first place) to meet our required task - hence the 12 hour shifts for the flights deploying a crew to the FI.
It really is the stuff of farce and would be funny if it didn't impact on the integrity of UK SAR cover - and all to save a couple of quid. It's not rocket science, if you want to provide a capability, you have to resource that capability properly - surely our Air-Rank Officers can understand that!
Sapper - the RN aren't on the FI roster and haven't declared a second standby crew at Prestwick or Culdrose for a long while so they are not fat for people. I get to go at Christmas thanks
However, the question still remains why we are not being properly manned to meet our task - PMA jumped too early on the bandwagon when downsizing to 4 crews was suggested and now that the EU WTD has to be complied with we are hopelessly undermanned (since we were never fully manned in the first place) to meet our required task - hence the 12 hour shifts for the flights deploying a crew to the FI.
It really is the stuff of farce and would be funny if it didn't impact on the integrity of UK SAR cover - and all to save a couple of quid. It's not rocket science, if you want to provide a capability, you have to resource that capability properly - surely our Air-Rank Officers can understand that!
Sapper - the RN aren't on the FI roster and haven't declared a second standby crew at Prestwick or Culdrose for a long while so they are not fat for people. I get to go at Christmas thanks
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
You know it really is a case of Duh!!what did they think would happen.
I think I still have the small poster from my wall with the words bang head here and a small cross
- ah bring back the glorious good old days!!!
Still can't complain its sunny here!
You know it really is a case of Duh!!what did they think would happen.
I think I still have the small poster from my wall with the words bang head here and a small cross
- ah bring back the glorious good old days!!!Still can't complain its sunny here!
Jacko -
whilst I share your cynicism - this round of 12 hour shifts is different to that announced by Quentin Davies recently. That came as a huge surprise to all of us because SARH was supposed to provide no lesser service and suddenly he is telling the world that 3 flights will be 12 hours only post 2012.
Why? well it is no secret that the bidders are struggling to work out where to make a profit in the SARH contract because (SURPRISE SURPRISE) 24 hour SAR cover costs money. All those who glibly stated that Mil SAR was too expensive and too 'gold-plated' a solution are suddenly realising that if you want to be able to rescue people day or night, land or sea, fair weather or foul, you need well trained and equipped crews or you will fall on your a*se.
What needs asking is how much the interim contract (4 flights for 5 years) has actually cost and see how that compares to the projected £5Bn for SARH. I still don't see where the money is going to come from - the govt is broke.
In the meantime as we stumble towards 2012, the military need to protect what exists in SAR not wind it down ready for privatisation - give us 5 crews per flight or bin the FI det and let us get on with what we do best!
Is this real, or is it to establish something that couldn't be done even under the military 'Gold Standard', 'money-no-object' service, and that will therefore be accepted when it continues under the shabby privatised nonsense that follows?
Why? well it is no secret that the bidders are struggling to work out where to make a profit in the SARH contract because (SURPRISE SURPRISE) 24 hour SAR cover costs money. All those who glibly stated that Mil SAR was too expensive and too 'gold-plated' a solution are suddenly realising that if you want to be able to rescue people day or night, land or sea, fair weather or foul, you need well trained and equipped crews or you will fall on your a*se.
What needs asking is how much the interim contract (4 flights for 5 years) has actually cost and see how that compares to the projected £5Bn for SARH. I still don't see where the money is going to come from - the govt is broke.
In the meantime as we stumble towards 2012, the military need to protect what exists in SAR not wind it down ready for privatisation - give us 5 crews per flight or bin the FI det and let us get on with what we do best!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In the meantime as we stumble towards 2012, the military need to protect what exists in SAR not wind it down ready for privatisation - give us 5 crews per flight or bin the FI det and let us get on with what we do best! "
................... Belly ache !
................... Belly ache !
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statement from MCA
Sapper,
Just to set the record straight, this is not a statement from the MCA. I think you will find that has come from the MOD/RAF as the last sentence refers.
Just to set the record straight, this is not a statement from the MCA. I think you will find that has come from the MOD/RAF as the last sentence refers.
