How can I kill a tiger armed only with a biro?

Tigers armed with biros are notorious killers. They use the biro to write you out of the picture.


:rolleyes:

Why is the alphabet in that order? Is it because of that song?

6Z3

Show me the way to Arm a Dillo...........

Sha-la-lah, la-lah, la-lah-lah!

:cool:

TOG

Crab,
I'm a SAR p1 for CHC in Shannon. We get 60 hours a month to train with in an aircraft almost identical to the Seaking. In the 5 years I have been here, there have been very few jobs turned down.... almost none. Of those that have, there are none that I know of that resulted in loss of life.
The co. receives receive VERY stiff financial penalties if we are offline or reduced in capability for any reason. If the aircraft goes u/s they will jump thru hoops to get it back online. And at the end of the day we do what we are told to do by our client... the Coastguard. If they want "more" the government have to pay more... but then again a military op. would be the same.
When the contracts come up for renewal the client gets offers from all prospective bidders and gets the best for its buck. Subsequently we get audited by the client, the IAA, and internally on a very regular basis... If theres a snag it is addressed until the Coastguard are happy.
We have had pilots and rearcrew from all backgrounds including RAF. Most were excellent, some were average but it was the individual rather than the background that was the common factor in the best of them.
I have no doubt that the RAF have provided an excellent service. I hope they still do. But thats not to say that others cant provide an equally good service too.... regardless of how the cash gets from the taxpayer to the winch hook.

60 million a year???? And how much change would a civvy contractor get for providing the full SAR package - cabs, crew and maintainance?? Me thinks the military are being ripped off. Again.

I am quite frankly shocked that anyone dare second guess the SARF Commander and the Cheif Coastguard in their bid for World domination. :eek: (Evil laugh!)

tanewa,

I wonder where you were last Thursday morning?!!

VG

Did I see you there?

Tanewha

Regret AM only - however, it did give me time to reflect on the 60th anniversary of our successful defence against another vertically challenged moustachioed megalomaniac!!

VG

Decks - that means you get less than half the training that we do and rather confirms my concern. All the auditing and bean counting doesn't look at capability just cost effectiveness so as long as your customer (CG) is happy then so are the bean counters. Who checks your operational effectiveness?

The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry. They just can't answer the fact that Bristows produce stunning serviceability from S61s that have 3 times the number of hours of our Sea kings!

"our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry. They just can't answer the fact that Bristows produce stunning serviceability from S61s that have 3 times the number of hours of our Sea kings!"

Crab

Perhaps the money Bristows are saving on training is being spent on spares.

Regards

Retard

That’s because we over maintain our aircraft...wasting millions of pounds with unnecessary maintenance.

rafloo, I hope that was meant tongue-in-cheek or you have missed the point of the previous posts! 12.5% serviceablity is pathetically poor and if true then the IPTL needs shooting! So no over servicing here then!

Crab,
In response to your point re hours I think 60 per base is sufficent.
We have 8 pilots and 8 crewmen per base who are doing nothing only SAR. 720 hours annually gives 180 per pilot (and per crewman)and this IMHO is enough. Do you average a lot more? We have a wall planner with a list of around 30 items all of which must be done within a specific time period...usually 90 days. In reality we get to do most of the skills on a much more regular basis.
The operational audits are done by an independant auditor employed by the IRCG. He decides if we're doing what it says on the tin. Again he decides what is needed, reviews this on a regular basis and makes his reports and recommendations to the IRCG.
The key word as you rightly point out is cost effectiveness. The bean counters are not some guys who hoard the money if they dont spend it. They are giving it to the cancer units and the homeless folks etc. And there is huge competition for this money. Every night of the week there is a documentary from some deserving group looking for more funding. Another SAR unit or a cancer unit???? Its up to the politicians.
In civvie SAR the goal is to provide the very best service on a finite budget. (Obviously budget is never a consideration on a job.)The bidding competition gives companies the opportunity to do the best they can with the cost base they have. If they make some money, then it motivates them to do it well so they can renew their contract. Is it perfect...? no.. but does it work well?...yes.
I would love to see 10 S92's on the coast at purpose built airfields, with FLIR, NVG and a fleet of vessells at their disposal for training. But unless Abramovich buys Ireland then it aint going to happen!!!

Not tongue in cheek at all. The reason our aircraft are u/s for 88% of the time is because we over-maintain them. In the air force we have approx 12 maintainers/engineers per aircraft. Bristows have 2. Our helicopters require in the order of 6 maintenance hours per flying hours. Bristows require 3 per flying hour.

The aircraft in the Armed forces are here to provide work for our engineers....not to fly

rafloo

Given the lack of capability and availability, the move to contractorisation looks good value for the public purse then.

Regards

Retard

Exactly. And with luck we can reduce the excess manpower we have at this station.

Decks - we have 10 pilots and 10 rearcrew on average per flight but that allows support for courses, Falklands detachments etc. On an average day a crew will fly 2 hrs day and 2 hrs night although this could be cut down if we were not forced into stats chasing to meet our mandatory requirements.
Does the independent auditor fly with you to check your operational capability and effectiveness or is airborne performance not seen as part of the audit process?

We have pilot and rearcrew instructors on each flight, a squadron trg team for assessment and a SARF standards unit for checking the overall effectiveness on the ground and in the air.

and that is probably why you will never be cost effective. In the big, grown-up world, professional avaitors are expected to survive on one base check and one line check a year. This does not mean that if you are flying with a line training captain that this trip is not also assessed. It also means that the aircraft and personnel are left to get on with the job in hand - probably why Bristows' 61s are serviceable as they are not thrashed to death doing unnecessary GH. I haven't noticed an increased accident rate amongst civilian operators compared to the RAF and they also seem to get the job done just the same.

Perhaps may moons ago the RAF could justify its superior position but not now - old, u/s aircraft flown by quite inexperienced crews - the writing is on the wall.

Crab (and subsequent ranters post 1900 on 17th!)

["The one good to come of privatisation is serviceable aircraft - our IPT seem proud of a pathetic 12.5% serviceability which just wouldn't be tolerated in industry."]

I think you will find that the 12.5 figure is not a percentage - rather an average number of available aircraft per day.

Not even the most inept tabloid journalist would believe any organisation would be happy with 12.5% equipment serviceability

VG