SAR: Search & Rescue Ops [Archive Copy]
Guest
Posts: n/a
heedm
Contrary to your last post, at no stage did I say that there were no rules on a SarOp, and we most certainly did not fly with a 'no rules' attitude. We were always fully aware of the rules and complied with them.
However, the knowledge we had of the rules, enabled us to make informed decisions within the flexibility of helicopter operating parameters. As has been mentioned previously, it's not that easy to push a Sea King far, because it just won't let you!
Contrary to your last post, at no stage did I say that there were no rules on a SarOp, and we most certainly did not fly with a 'no rules' attitude. We were always fully aware of the rules and complied with them.
However, the knowledge we had of the rules, enabled us to make informed decisions within the flexibility of helicopter operating parameters. As has been mentioned previously, it's not that easy to push a Sea King far, because it just won't let you!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some thoughts:
My vote goes to the Captain, who made the vicious choice between strict adherence to procedure and human life. The gap between those two is what I think we used to call "airmanship." Airmanship is a term we used before we got so good at what we do that we thought we could write it all down as rules, and not apply any thought.
For the doubters:
what was Max Gross Weight of the B-17G? What was typical takeoff gross weight when it was time to win the war?
My snake in Vietnam had a MGW of 9500 lbs, and the typical mission takeoff weight was 10,700. When I, as the unit SIP, told my CO that we were busting Army regs, he asked me,"What do we leave home, the bullets or the gas?" I never forgot that!
Well Done, Triple Matched Trq!
My vote goes to the Captain, who made the vicious choice between strict adherence to procedure and human life. The gap between those two is what I think we used to call "airmanship." Airmanship is a term we used before we got so good at what we do that we thought we could write it all down as rules, and not apply any thought.
For the doubters:
what was Max Gross Weight of the B-17G? What was typical takeoff gross weight when it was time to win the war?
My snake in Vietnam had a MGW of 9500 lbs, and the typical mission takeoff weight was 10,700. When I, as the unit SIP, told my CO that we were busting Army regs, he asked me,"What do we leave home, the bullets or the gas?" I never forgot that!
Well Done, Triple Matched Trq!
Noble sentiments Nick but in recent conflicts the evidence has proved against this 'we are at war so all the rules go out of the window' and highlighted that sensible, flight safety based prodcedures that work well in peace-time also prevent keen combat pilots doing the enemy's job for him.
20/20 hindsight is a great way to be able to justify your decisions and I take the point that when guys are dying you don't want to be the one who says no to the mission, but those guys will die just the same if you launch and crash. So it is with SAR - we all want to save lives, it's our job and many of us feel passionate about it. But, we are not supermen and the hardest decision to make is the one not to go/to turn back/not to winch out because the risk to the aircraft and crew (who are the captain's first responsibility)ooutweighs the benefits to the casualty.
If any shore-based medic is asked whether or not to casevac a casualty from a ship he will almost always say yes because he must err on the side of caution. He may well give a different decision if he is able to physically examine the casualty but the only way of doing that is to get him out there. There are many occasions when SAR aircraft are scrambled to injured/dying crew many miles out in the Atlantic, only to arrive and find the bloke standing on the deck with his suitcase packed, ready to go home.
Despite this, we will always launch and do our best to recover them but at the point we start to break limits weather/aircraft/crew or whatever we must be fully prepared for others to criticise unless there was no possible alternative course of action - not so in this recent case.
I don't want to die in a heroic mission that fails to succeed - I want a long career of saving lives professionally.
20/20 hindsight is a great way to be able to justify your decisions and I take the point that when guys are dying you don't want to be the one who says no to the mission, but those guys will die just the same if you launch and crash. So it is with SAR - we all want to save lives, it's our job and many of us feel passionate about it. But, we are not supermen and the hardest decision to make is the one not to go/to turn back/not to winch out because the risk to the aircraft and crew (who are the captain's first responsibility)ooutweighs the benefits to the casualty.
If any shore-based medic is asked whether or not to casevac a casualty from a ship he will almost always say yes because he must err on the side of caution. He may well give a different decision if he is able to physically examine the casualty but the only way of doing that is to get him out there. There are many occasions when SAR aircraft are scrambled to injured/dying crew many miles out in the Atlantic, only to arrive and find the bloke standing on the deck with his suitcase packed, ready to go home.
Despite this, we will always launch and do our best to recover them but at the point we start to break limits weather/aircraft/crew or whatever we must be fully prepared for others to criticise unless there was no possible alternative course of action - not so in this recent case.
I don't want to die in a heroic mission that fails to succeed - I want a long career of saving lives professionally.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: france46
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember the tragic loss of the Moushole Lifeboat many years ago. The Coxswain rejected 2 crew members because the weather was so foul that he would only take one person from any Family.
The SAR Wessex from Culdrose was on station but the Captain (a USN Lt) refused to allow the Crewman to go down because of the appalling conditions. The weather conditions were way outside the limitations of the Wessex but they remained on station.
The crew of the distressed vessel and the entire crew of the Lifeboat perished in the tragedy.
The USN Captain paid his own fare across the Atlantic so that he could pay tribute to the RNLI crew at the Inquest. He described how the Lifeboat had actually timed a run and "beached" itself on the side of the Ship so that the crew could get aboard. This they did but the Lifeboat itself later succumbed to the Elements.
If you are trying to save life then the normal "Rules" for Peacetime Operation do not necesarily apply.
PS
I see on SKY News that HMG are going to introduce legislation that will allow Ambulance Drivers to "jump" Red Lights in an Emergency thus bring them into line with the other Emergency Services.
There are times when normal "RULES" have to give way.
The SAR Wessex from Culdrose was on station but the Captain (a USN Lt) refused to allow the Crewman to go down because of the appalling conditions. The weather conditions were way outside the limitations of the Wessex but they remained on station.
The crew of the distressed vessel and the entire crew of the Lifeboat perished in the tragedy.
The USN Captain paid his own fare across the Atlantic so that he could pay tribute to the RNLI crew at the Inquest. He described how the Lifeboat had actually timed a run and "beached" itself on the side of the Ship so that the crew could get aboard. This they did but the Lifeboat itself later succumbed to the Elements.
If you are trying to save life then the normal "Rules" for Peacetime Operation do not necesarily apply.
PS
I see on SKY News that HMG are going to introduce legislation that will allow Ambulance Drivers to "jump" Red Lights in an Emergency thus bring them into line with the other Emergency Services.
There are times when normal "RULES" have to give way.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a simple question?
Both Nick and CRAB have very good points!
So let me add to this......!
If their is justification to breaking/ exceeding limits and reg's, WHY do we have them at all.
On one side: why publish a flight manual for SAR/EMS crews who are "justified" in exceeding them????
On the other side, why operate or buy an a/c for your op's that you know cannot provide necessary performance???
Certain situations require( as Nick says) disciplined airmanship. Totally agree on that. But generally we must have rules and limits...... something has to stop us from making bonehead decisions. We are humans..... not perfect beings!!!
D.K
So let me add to this......!
If their is justification to breaking/ exceeding limits and reg's, WHY do we have them at all.
On one side: why publish a flight manual for SAR/EMS crews who are "justified" in exceeding them????
On the other side, why operate or buy an a/c for your op's that you know cannot provide necessary performance???
Certain situations require( as Nick says) disciplined airmanship. Totally agree on that. But generally we must have rules and limits...... something has to stop us from making bonehead decisions. We are humans..... not perfect beings!!!
D.K
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South of the border
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you're at war, and on the day the General says "over the top lads, into a hot LZ with a load of soldiers and I expect a few of you won't come back". Flight safety? MAUW precludes carrying that extra box of ammo for the troops? Arse. Salute, yes sir thankyou very much, and execute.
Now I'm not suggesting that SAR always justifies breaking rules (although it might) and I'm not suggesting that wartime ops mean flight safety is ignored (but it might). War, by definition, is not safe. There is a sliding scale of mission vs safety, starting at commercial passenger operations and ending in the commitment of military resources to a high-risk mission.
Now I'm not suggesting that SAR always justifies breaking rules (although it might) and I'm not suggesting that wartime ops mean flight safety is ignored (but it might). War, by definition, is not safe. There is a sliding scale of mission vs safety, starting at commercial passenger operations and ending in the commitment of military resources to a high-risk mission.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AB, Canada
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you're exceeding the MAUW, make sure you mention it. If the plan for the battle includes losing some machines due to disregard for the orders, then they won't be surprised. However, if the plan doesn't call for that loss then perhaps there's a plan to use those machines tomorrow.
It was mentioned before that the rules are not just for safety of the crew, but also they indicate what risk has been accepted by higher command. If the risk has been accepted then so have the consequences which include the chance of loss of resources.
This is quite valid in the SAR scenario. If you purposely break a machine to try and complete a mission that you can't otherwise do, then what happens to the following missions.
Again, I'm not saying don't break the orders, just make sure you have considered the consequences.
It was mentioned before that the rules are not just for safety of the crew, but also they indicate what risk has been accepted by higher command. If the risk has been accepted then so have the consequences which include the chance of loss of resources.
This is quite valid in the SAR scenario. If you purposely break a machine to try and complete a mission that you can't otherwise do, then what happens to the following missions.
Again, I'm not saying don't break the orders, just make sure you have considered the consequences.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am on a SAR unit not a million miles from you folks and I think I might have considered exceeding the speed on the way out but not planned to do it on the way back.
When we find ourselves analysing with optimism rather than a hint of pessimism then tis time to stand back.... particularly on long range jobs. As far as the speed goes, I really doubt the marketers would let the engineers put restrictions on speed if they didnt think they were necessary.
Fair play to the capt for coming on and letting us all think about it and learn. Would like to shake his hand.... if he can plan to get a guy off a trawler in a 6m+ sea on a no moon night in ten mins, then his hand is a lot steadier than mine.
When we find ourselves analysing with optimism rather than a hint of pessimism then tis time to stand back.... particularly on long range jobs. As far as the speed goes, I really doubt the marketers would let the engineers put restrictions on speed if they didnt think they were necessary.
Fair play to the capt for coming on and letting us all think about it and learn. Would like to shake his hand.... if he can plan to get a guy off a trawler in a 6m+ sea on a no moon night in ten mins, then his hand is a lot steadier than mine.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a vast space between blind obedience (which none of the strict constructionists here really espouse) and the wild man concept (which none of the rest of us really condone. That middle is where we all really are.
Should all the written rules be followed always, absolutely? No, such work slowdowns are how unions beat management into submission. If I am stuck behind a person driving exactly at the posted speed limit, I realize how few of us obey everything, all the time.
Should we just ride our helos like stolen cars, and burn them when we are finished? Of course not, the rules are usually wise, well thought out and surely for our protection.
The tiny portion of rule breaking that we are discussing, that some of us condone, and others criticize, is a miniscule fraction of those rules we all obey, cheerfully every day.
We all actually agree, don't we?
Should all the written rules be followed always, absolutely? No, such work slowdowns are how unions beat management into submission. If I am stuck behind a person driving exactly at the posted speed limit, I realize how few of us obey everything, all the time.
Should we just ride our helos like stolen cars, and burn them when we are finished? Of course not, the rules are usually wise, well thought out and surely for our protection.
The tiny portion of rule breaking that we are discussing, that some of us condone, and others criticize, is a miniscule fraction of those rules we all obey, cheerfully every day.
We all actually agree, don't we?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AB, Canada
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course we do, Nick. But what interesting discussion comes from the slightly different interpretations!
Awesome thread. I'd like to hear from more operators/more countries. Are we all really so close in our thinking? UN could learn from helicopter pilots.
Awesome thread. I'd like to hear from more operators/more countries. Are we all really so close in our thinking? UN could learn from helicopter pilots.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a former military aviator, with experience of civil SAR (S61 and B212) I have found this to be one of the few interesting posts on PPRuNe for a while and it has highlighted the old dictum of 'plus ca change, c'est toujours la meme chose' between the services. How refreshing to see that our 2 test pilots are former non Air Force (of whichever country) aviators and have given a (well deserved thumbs-up or 'BZ') to Triple whilst our resident 'Crab' (for whose well-thought answers, I have now, as always, the greatest respect) still displays the typical 'Crab' opinions which so made me loathe my time as an exchange pilot with the 'Crabs'. Whilst on my exchange I was threatened with a court martial (never happened because I had taken great care to sit down and learn ALL their never-to-be-broken-under-any-circumstances rules) and almost had to file against a Senior Officer for Redress of Grievance. Thansk goodness for a new Station Commander and new Flight Commander before I finished my tour.
Triple Torque, I commend you for having made public what happened to you and your thinking behind your decision to press on with your mission. I hope that if I ever have to call on the resources of an SAR unit, you are the commander of the aircraft trying to save me.
Nick and Shawn - really good to see that, in common with many of the test pilots I have met, you are down-to-earth, practical people who still understand what ordinary pilots think about and have to go through.
Triple Torque, I commend you for having made public what happened to you and your thinking behind your decision to press on with your mission. I hope that if I ever have to call on the resources of an SAR unit, you are the commander of the aircraft trying to save me.
Nick and Shawn - really good to see that, in common with many of the test pilots I have met, you are down-to-earth, practical people who still understand what ordinary pilots think about and have to go through.
Soggyboxers - I do understand your criticisms of the RAF - I was on exchange with the AAC for 7 years and found the lack of obsessive rule-following and oversupervision very refreshing. Now I am back in the fold I still despair at the unneccessary layers of confusing orders we are required to observe as each succesive strata of 'management' seek to cover their backsides to ensure they could never be held responsible for anything a pilot did.
However, 2 points - firstly it was the RN who were threatening to court martial triplematchedtq - a massive overreaction - it probably would have been a unit enquiry in the RAF or Form5 action in the AAC. Secondly my comments on triplematchedtq's actions are based on my opinions - a chase aircraft is a very good idea whether it was RN or RAF - only last year a Chivenor cab was positioned as a chase ac for a similar job in awful conditions, the RN cab had to turn back and the RAF one did the job. It could easily have been the other way round but the job got done.
However, 2 points - firstly it was the RN who were threatening to court martial triplematchedtq - a massive overreaction - it probably would have been a unit enquiry in the RAF or Form5 action in the AAC. Secondly my comments on triplematchedtq's actions are based on my opinions - a chase aircraft is a very good idea whether it was RN or RAF - only last year a Chivenor cab was positioned as a chase ac for a similar job in awful conditions, the RN cab had to turn back and the RAF one did the job. It could easily have been the other way round but the job got done.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
One of the truly refreshing things about helicopters in general, is that rules do not cover every situation. Experience and judgement are (and have to be) used on a daily basis, and for the most part, they are used pretty wisely.
Rules are guidance, and anyone who thinks they can write rules to cover every situation is a fool of the first magnitude.
Limitations are another matter, and have slightly less latitude for interpretation, but as this example has shown, may have some room for intelligent exceedence on a very limited basis.
This discussion is one example, and should be used in lots of crewrooms and flight schools to discuss what goes into good decision making.
I often wondered at the mentality of senior military officers who would condone airshow displays of their helicopters which broke at least 5 limitations, and then try to court martial someone who made a decision in a time of some stress without assistance from higher authority...
Rules are guidance, and anyone who thinks they can write rules to cover every situation is a fool of the first magnitude.
Limitations are another matter, and have slightly less latitude for interpretation, but as this example has shown, may have some room for intelligent exceedence on a very limited basis.
This discussion is one example, and should be used in lots of crewrooms and flight schools to discuss what goes into good decision making.
I often wondered at the mentality of senior military officers who would condone airshow displays of their helicopters which broke at least 5 limitations, and then try to court martial someone who made a decision in a time of some stress without assistance from higher authority...
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
Thanks for your reply and for not taking my criticisms of your service personally. As usual, your replies are lacking in bias and well thought out. Now I understand more about the thinking behind your previous post and fully agree. I also have to say that during my time on exchange to the 'Crabs' I found many excellent individuals who were brought down by the excessive number of rules. Any of my old friends out there may well remember the wonderful 'terror driving' club at Odious. Great sport!
Shawn,
Great point of view. I especially like and agree with the last paragraph of your post.
Thanks for your reply and for not taking my criticisms of your service personally. As usual, your replies are lacking in bias and well thought out. Now I understand more about the thinking behind your previous post and fully agree. I also have to say that during my time on exchange to the 'Crabs' I found many excellent individuals who were brought down by the excessive number of rules. Any of my old friends out there may well remember the wonderful 'terror driving' club at Odious. Great sport!
Shawn,
Great point of view. I especially like and agree with the last paragraph of your post.
Shawn - agreed 100%
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I often wondered if anyone who was being faced with a court martial for breaking rules or limitations ever used a defence based on what was seen at flying displays.
I particularly remember seeing one large helicopter which had, among other things, some pretty onerous angle of bank limits on it being thrown around with great abandon. If my rapidly failing memory serves me, I recall counting about 5 gross violations of flight manual limits during the display. The display had been approved by the Air Officer Commanding the particular group which flew the machines.
The service which was doing the display was quite mortified to find several years later that their airframes were all cracking, mosly due to people putting on impromptu displays of their own, based on what they saw at the airshows.
I particularly remember seeing one large helicopter which had, among other things, some pretty onerous angle of bank limits on it being thrown around with great abandon. If my rapidly failing memory serves me, I recall counting about 5 gross violations of flight manual limits during the display. The display had been approved by the Air Officer Commanding the particular group which flew the machines.
The service which was doing the display was quite mortified to find several years later that their airframes were all cracking, mosly due to people putting on impromptu displays of their own, based on what they saw at the airshows.
Surely not the Sea King Shawn!!!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
No names, no pack drill, as my sergeants used to say. The impressive limit-busting display happened at the International Air Tattoos in Greenham Common in 1981 (does that date me, or what?), so if you know any other helicopter solo displays that were given you would narrow down the type quite nicely.
But you're extremely warm on the type... in fact, very hot. Now name the service doing the flying....
But you're extremely warm on the type... in fact, very hot. Now name the service doing the flying....
Rearrange the letters F A R for the likely culprit and I could probably name the pilot although I won't even though he has left the service. Someone authorized 90 nose up/90 nose down with a 180 roll from the vertical - can't think what that did for the stn 290 cracking!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Southern UK
Age: 63
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This topic is as old as Airborne SAR and will continue as long as aircraft have limitations in their operating manuals.
I have in the late Daddy Wunper’s personal effects a letter dating back to his time as a SAR pilot in the RN fifty years ago. I find it hugely entertaining in the context of this thread and wish to share it with the Rotorheads. For the background the rescued crew were from a Meteor night fighter squadron based at Tangmere and the Helicopter was an S51 Dragonfly, (which required some engineering inspections after the sortie but was back flying later the same day). By the by there was no inter-service back stabbing over this rescue, far from it, Dad said he was invited to numerous functions at Tangmere for the rest of his tenure on the SAR flight at Ford.
As for the rescue that triggered this most interesting thread, I find it incredible that boards of inquiry have even to be thought about over such incidents today, and that the subject polarises opinions so much in the helicopter world, how times must have changed!
Triple Matched TQ----------Good on you!
Wunper
I have in the late Daddy Wunper’s personal effects a letter dating back to his time as a SAR pilot in the RN fifty years ago. I find it hugely entertaining in the context of this thread and wish to share it with the Rotorheads. For the background the rescued crew were from a Meteor night fighter squadron based at Tangmere and the Helicopter was an S51 Dragonfly, (which required some engineering inspections after the sortie but was back flying later the same day). By the by there was no inter-service back stabbing over this rescue, far from it, Dad said he was invited to numerous functions at Tangmere for the rest of his tenure on the SAR flight at Ford.
Letter on Admiralty notepaper dated 28th October 1953
My Dear Admiral,
The following is a personal letter from the Secretary of State for Air to the First Lord
“I am sure you will have heard of the remarkable rescue of the pilot and navigator of a Meteor, which crashed off the South coast on October 20th, by a Naval helicopter from Ford.
I am told that the helicopter Captain had our two men “winched” aboard from their dinghy within thirteen minutes of the crash. What is more, the helicopter Captain deliberately exceeded his permitted all-up weight so that both men could be rescued in one trip. It was a most courageous action and was carried out with great skill.
Perhaps you would be good enough to pass on my congratulations to the Captain and crew.”
The first Lord would be grateful if you would convey the Secretary of State for Air’s message to the Captain and crew of the helicopter
Yours sincerely ,,,
(I have sent copies of this letter to the Second Sea Lord and Fifth Sea Lord)
My Dear Admiral,
The following is a personal letter from the Secretary of State for Air to the First Lord
“I am sure you will have heard of the remarkable rescue of the pilot and navigator of a Meteor, which crashed off the South coast on October 20th, by a Naval helicopter from Ford.
I am told that the helicopter Captain had our two men “winched” aboard from their dinghy within thirteen minutes of the crash. What is more, the helicopter Captain deliberately exceeded his permitted all-up weight so that both men could be rescued in one trip. It was a most courageous action and was carried out with great skill.
Perhaps you would be good enough to pass on my congratulations to the Captain and crew.”
The first Lord would be grateful if you would convey the Secretary of State for Air’s message to the Captain and crew of the helicopter
Yours sincerely ,,,
(I have sent copies of this letter to the Second Sea Lord and Fifth Sea Lord)
As for the rescue that triggered this most interesting thread, I find it incredible that boards of inquiry have even to be thought about over such incidents today, and that the subject polarises opinions so much in the helicopter world, how times must have changed!
Triple Matched TQ----------Good on you!
Wunper