The future of UK SAR post SAR-H
Guest
Posts: n/a
Would any money not be better spent increasing the longevity and reliability of the aircraft already roled, crewed and resourced for SAR, rather than trying to bend the Merlin to that role. The Sea King is well suited to the role but it is suffering reliability issues aplenty. These could be fixed though. So rather than trying to fix a host of issues we could concentrate our efforts in just one area.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
I too am not an SAR man, but isn't this debate rather more than a simplistic "what do we already have that can fill the gasp?". Are there not such issues as downdraught - or whatever the technical term is - to be considered? I think there was a case in Afghanistan a couple of years ago when a Chinook was used in an attempt to rescue someone from a minefield and the consequences wqere pretty horrendous due to the downdraught. If I'm wrong on this, then I apologise; I'm not setting out here to upset anyone.
On a simililar issue, I think we are on very dangerous ground if we use the current capability to argue for a new capability. Consider the reduction in the size of the aircraft fleet we have undergone since the current SAR set-up was organised, and then compare the number of call-outs for military rescue v civilian rescue and I believe that the argument will be seen as fundamentally flawed. Perhaps what is needed is a Nationall Rescue Organisation, part of which is manned by the military - the aircrew/groundcrew part could perhaps be the military contribution to the funding - a holistic approach rather than a militarycentric approach may have a better chance of success in the current financial climate.
On a simililar issue, I think we are on very dangerous ground if we use the current capability to argue for a new capability. Consider the reduction in the size of the aircraft fleet we have undergone since the current SAR set-up was organised, and then compare the number of call-outs for military rescue v civilian rescue and I believe that the argument will be seen as fundamentally flawed. Perhaps what is needed is a Nationall Rescue Organisation, part of which is manned by the military - the aircrew/groundcrew part could perhaps be the military contribution to the funding - a holistic approach rather than a militarycentric approach may have a better chance of success in the current financial climate.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Merlin (UK variant) - Not designed primarily for SAR. Major rotorwash issues in the hover. Very expensive to operate. Currently abysmal serviceability & spares support. Significant investment required upfront to convert to SAR primary role (& paint it yellow/red/grey
)
SAR SK - Old airframe & despite the good ideas club suggesting it could soldier on for 20 more years...all those in the know (including crab) agree it couldn't without major financial input. That level of investment requires high level MOD budget approval from a MOD who are broke & looking for further cuts & who have openly stated that SAR is no longer considered core MOD business. Not to mention the requirement to renegotiate spares/engineering support with westlands.....how expensive
SAR-H may be dead/suspended but there is still a real need to find a replacement airframe. Forget what has gone before. UK is broke & needs to find a solution to UK SAR provision - urgently. Current SK unreliability may get replaced on an interim basis with a cheap to run platform. Not as capable as the SK in its hey day but more reliable & cheaper than current provision.
The who flies it debate is a whole different ball game. Options according to SW are;
1. Mil keep going......may be difficult to justify for same reason as above - MOD no longer see SAR as core business & are trying to find manpower savings.
2. Civ take over completely....similarities to SAR-H contract provision may lead to legal action by ousted bidders/need to put whole thing back out to tender...time consuming etc etc.
3. Mil/Civ mix - similar to old SAR-H intent but perhaps change the ratios...same old arguments as before that led to original decision to remove mil from SAR-H...there's no appetite for it anymore amongst the decision makers.
As always it comes down to money. Are there commercial options out there with the finance to bail the govt out of a difficult problem now & provide a SAR service for the next 10 yrs? If the answer is yes then I see option 2 being pushed through. If the answer is no then I see a MOD footprint being maintained but one that looks significantly different to current RAF/RN provision. New/reduced basing strategy (more civ bases?), 12 hr bases to reduce mil manpower levels, strict controlling guidelines on civ tasking to reduce costs to MOD budget etc etc.
Whatever the outcome only fools with their heads in the sand can be expecting no change over the next 2-3 yrs. The clever ones amongst you will be the ones who are ready to embrace the future rather than wallow in self pity about what has been lost.
)SAR SK - Old airframe & despite the good ideas club suggesting it could soldier on for 20 more years...all those in the know (including crab) agree it couldn't without major financial input. That level of investment requires high level MOD budget approval from a MOD who are broke & looking for further cuts & who have openly stated that SAR is no longer considered core MOD business. Not to mention the requirement to renegotiate spares/engineering support with westlands.....how expensive
SAR-H may be dead/suspended but there is still a real need to find a replacement airframe. Forget what has gone before. UK is broke & needs to find a solution to UK SAR provision - urgently. Current SK unreliability may get replaced on an interim basis with a cheap to run platform. Not as capable as the SK in its hey day but more reliable & cheaper than current provision.
The who flies it debate is a whole different ball game. Options according to SW are;
1. Mil keep going......may be difficult to justify for same reason as above - MOD no longer see SAR as core business & are trying to find manpower savings.
2. Civ take over completely....similarities to SAR-H contract provision may lead to legal action by ousted bidders/need to put whole thing back out to tender...time consuming etc etc.
3. Mil/Civ mix - similar to old SAR-H intent but perhaps change the ratios...same old arguments as before that led to original decision to remove mil from SAR-H...there's no appetite for it anymore amongst the decision makers.
As always it comes down to money. Are there commercial options out there with the finance to bail the govt out of a difficult problem now & provide a SAR service for the next 10 yrs? If the answer is yes then I see option 2 being pushed through. If the answer is no then I see a MOD footprint being maintained but one that looks significantly different to current RAF/RN provision. New/reduced basing strategy (more civ bases?), 12 hr bases to reduce mil manpower levels, strict controlling guidelines on civ tasking to reduce costs to MOD budget etc etc.
Whatever the outcome only fools with their heads in the sand can be expecting no change over the next 2-3 yrs. The clever ones amongst you will be the ones who are ready to embrace the future rather than wallow in self pity about what has been lost.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On my soap box
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realise that Civ tasking/rescues comes out of the dept of transport budget! Not MOD Budget, can't reduce hours of SAR Flts, politically unacceptable.
Returning to lurk mode.
Returning to lurk mode.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SB - Glad I caused you to rise from your lurk...albeit briefly & looking at your profile I wont expect any further posts from you for another 2 yrs
I'm no budget expert but are you suggesting that mil SAR charge the DoT per civvy rescue? I understand there is a charge for hospital transfers but don't think its as cut & dry as you imply. Does CG SAR charge the MoD if they pick up a serviceman? I accept the DoT budget contributes to UK SAR provision but my point is that with all central budgets being cut I would expect there to be greater scrutiny on tasking to ensure it is essential.
People have said the same thing about closing hospitals....schools.....& just about every other cut this govt has imposed recently.....doesn't mean it don't happen in todays climate. The precedence is already there as SAR-H had already received the green light to do this at 2 mil bases.
Just my thoughts
SW
You do realise that Civ tasking/rescues comes out of the dept of transport budget! Not MOD Budget
can't reduce hours of SAR Flts, politically unacceptable.
Just my thoughts
SW
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Rest Home for the Elderly
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listen Up Snags
Competitive Contract Notice
1. Title: GB-YEOVIL: The Sea King Project Team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance & Support at its offices in Yeovil
2. Awarding Authority:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, GB
3. Contract Type: SERVICES
4. Description: Helicopters. The Sea King Project team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance and Support to carry out the following tasks at its offices in Yeovil, Somerset.
Life Extension Programme technical assistance and embodiment management.
Sea King Integrated Operational Support re-evaluation.
Bifilar Vibration Absorber technical assistance.
UOR sustainment planning.
Search and Rescue Life Extension Programme study.
Quality Standard Requirement: ISO 9001
5. CPV Codes:
34711500 - Helicopters.
6. NUTS Codes :
UKK23 - Somerset
7. Main Site or Location of Works, Main Place of Delivery or Main Place of Performance: Somerset,
8. Reference Attributed by the Awarding Authority: SKC/0191
9. Estimated Value of Requirement: Category H1: 93K - 685K GBP
10. Deadline for Expression of Interest: 29/03/2011
11. Address to which they must be sent:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, G
1. Title: GB-YEOVIL: The Sea King Project Team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance & Support at its offices in Yeovil
2. Awarding Authority:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, GB
3. Contract Type: SERVICES
4. Description: Helicopters. The Sea King Project team has a possible requirement for the provision of Management Assistance and Support to carry out the following tasks at its offices in Yeovil, Somerset.
Life Extension Programme technical assistance and embodiment management.
Sea King Integrated Operational Support re-evaluation.
Bifilar Vibration Absorber technical assistance.
UOR sustainment planning.
Search and Rescue Life Extension Programme study.
Quality Standard Requirement: ISO 9001
5. CPV Codes:
34711500 - Helicopters.
6. NUTS Codes :
UKK23 - Somerset
7. Main Site or Location of Works, Main Place of Delivery or Main Place of Performance: Somerset,
8. Reference Attributed by the Awarding Authority: SKC/0191
9. Estimated Value of Requirement: Category H1: 93K - 685K GBP
10. Deadline for Expression of Interest: 29/03/2011
11. Address to which they must be sent:
Sea King (SK), DE&S
Sea King Project Team, Agusta Westland Helicopters, Box 50, Lysander Road, Yeovil, BA20 2YB, G
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leopold
Tis still early days me thinks. All options being considered.
If you believe others commentators we are about to review the scrapping of Tornado, Nimrod, Sentinel & Ark Royal....love to know where all this money is coming from...then lets talk manpower......
SW
a possible requirement
Integrated Operational Support re-evaluation
UOR sustainment planning
Life Extension Programme study
If you believe others commentators we are about to review the scrapping of Tornado, Nimrod, Sentinel & Ark Royal....love to know where all this money is coming from...then lets talk manpower......
SW
SW,
Have to agree with you; this smacks of a "buy time not capability" tender to permit our higher ups and political masters to avoid making a decision. There are staff officers probably burning the midnight oil to produce the answer they want to hear - chances are it doesn't exist...
Have to agree with you; this smacks of a "buy time not capability" tender to permit our higher ups and political masters to avoid making a decision. There are staff officers probably burning the midnight oil to produce the answer they want to hear - chances are it doesn't exist...
When does the current contract covering the 4 MCA bases expire?
How fast (not very) is the government contract letting (invitation to tender, time for bidders to tender, examine bids, let contract, etc) process?
What could possibly go wrong...
How fast (not very) is the government contract letting (invitation to tender, time for bidders to tender, examine bids, let contract, etc) process?
What could possibly go wrong...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it's 1 Jul 2012 with a 1-yr extension available.
In mid-2013 CHC will have some ex-irish SAR S61s surplus to requirements ...
Sven
never mind aircraft, anyone out there need a SAR pilot?
In mid-2013 CHC will have some ex-irish SAR S61s surplus to requirements ...
Sven
never mind aircraft, anyone out there need a SAR pilot?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Moray
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what i gather the latest is that the coastguard bases stay as such with the 92, the Navy bases will go with the RAF taking over them, the Sea King then plods on for a further decade, if this is the case the RAF are going to need to get some extra crews in.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am finding it very hard to believe the RAF will take over at the RN locations. Both their bases are in situ...and ever more so at Prestwick with the demise of the MRA4. Therefore it would seem an inefficient way of maintaining the status quo, unless of course other RAF flights are to downgrade or close, allowing MK3s anrd their crews to be shuffled, and all the MK5s to be scrapped. Interesting times eh?.....As for the Interim....I wonder if all bases will stay or whether Portland will go......
Cheers
Cheers
Nice try Happy Dayz - keep throwing out the chum and someone will bite
Fishing, me, never!!
