Sea King too old and putting Lives at risk.
Calli - I am well aware that the introduction of new aircraft will improve overall capability providing they are specified correctly. However, the S92 came without HF and has a sat tracker that is not compatible with the ARCCK system - I don't know why but a cycnic would say it is the continuing parochial attitude of the MCA to retain direct control of its assets and keep Kinloss out of the loop. I visited MRCC Falmouth in 2001 and the Oic was happy to point out where the military guys would sit when they were embedded in the organisation - they have always sought to have command and control over all SAR assets, hence the drive towards SARH.
We will have to wait and see how the 139 turns out.
I didn't say NVG was a black art but training up crews who have never used them will take a lot of hours which someone will have to pay for - this takes profit out of the contract which will need to be recovered from somewhere else.
I don't know where you were based but there is little underflying on training hours, despite some serviceability issues, so guys do seem to be getting most of their 4 hours a shift.
Northernstar - I do keep trying to reiterate that it is not the crews professionalism that is in doubt in any way shape or form, it is the reality of having a SAR service which needs to make a profit (why else are big businesses bidding for it). When the bottom line is the driving force, where is the incentive for management to make any concessions to improving standards, equipment or training? The only things that will force change after the contract is let will be legislation or, as in the sad case of Billy Deakin, an AAIB report. The military has proved itself wholly inept at contract writing and management in the past assuming that gentlemens agrrements still exist - they do right up to the point where the lawyers and accountants get involved. SARH needs to be as watertight as possible which is one reason I keep banging on about real capability as opposed to assumed or predicted.
We will have to wait and see how the 139 turns out.
I didn't say NVG was a black art but training up crews who have never used them will take a lot of hours which someone will have to pay for - this takes profit out of the contract which will need to be recovered from somewhere else.
I don't know where you were based but there is little underflying on training hours, despite some serviceability issues, so guys do seem to be getting most of their 4 hours a shift.
Northernstar - I do keep trying to reiterate that it is not the crews professionalism that is in doubt in any way shape or form, it is the reality of having a SAR service which needs to make a profit (why else are big businesses bidding for it). When the bottom line is the driving force, where is the incentive for management to make any concessions to improving standards, equipment or training? The only things that will force change after the contract is let will be legislation or, as in the sad case of Billy Deakin, an AAIB report. The military has proved itself wholly inept at contract writing and management in the past assuming that gentlemens agrrements still exist - they do right up to the point where the lawyers and accountants get involved. SARH needs to be as watertight as possible which is one reason I keep banging on about real capability as opposed to assumed or predicted.
hhmm....head above the parapet again,this time on the other side I'm afraid ,Crab!
NVG's intro'd to the RAF Seaking. 92/93. One (2hr) conversion sortie by visiting NVG qual'd QHI.
After that we (the operational crews) just integrated the use of NVG's into all our normal night training.
The NVG SOPS came years later!
NVG's intro'd to the RAF Seaking. 92/93. One (2hr) conversion sortie by visiting NVG qual'd QHI.
After that we (the operational crews) just integrated the use of NVG's into all our normal night training.
The NVG SOPS came years later!
Last edited by Bertie Thruster; 21st Nov 2007 at 12:49.
Maybe part of the question should be why does the airforce carry out the SAR task anyway as nearly all the rescues are related to civvy incidents.
Purloining info from the Meteor thread on the military forum the following figures are representative of the number of aircraft and lives lost by the airforce since the war in non combat related accidents.
1946....1014 a/c....677 fatalities
1956.....270..........150
1966.....62............33
1976.....33............20
1986.....19............10
1996.....21............2
2000's average 8 aircraft a year
Having a dedicated SAR when the airforce lost more aircraft in accidents than they have on strength today made sense.
However the military justification for a SAR capability in home waters no longer exists.
I would like to see a dedicated combat rescue helicopter purchased for military use.
It might save the marines having to go into action lashed to the sides of Apache's.
This might also get the SH people to take the SAR a little more seriously.
Purloining info from the Meteor thread on the military forum the following figures are representative of the number of aircraft and lives lost by the airforce since the war in non combat related accidents.
1946....1014 a/c....677 fatalities
1956.....270..........150
1966.....62............33
1976.....33............20
1986.....19............10
1996.....21............2
2000's average 8 aircraft a year
Having a dedicated SAR when the airforce lost more aircraft in accidents than they have on strength today made sense.
However the military justification for a SAR capability in home waters no longer exists.
I would like to see a dedicated combat rescue helicopter purchased for military use.
It might save the marines having to go into action lashed to the sides of Apache's.
This might also get the SH people to take the SAR a little more seriously.
Bertie - do you think the CAA would let that happen now though? They still won't let D&C Police operate into unrecced sites despite their experience levels.
Eric - the rescuing of downed/ejected military crews is our primary task but only counts for about 2% of our rescues which are, as you rightly say otherwise civilian in nature.
The UK Search and Rescue Region is enormous, reaching way out into the Atlantic where, for the moment, only the military crews go because we have better range than the S61. The Government is responsible for providing maritime and aeronautical SAR assets in whichever way it sees fit and has, for many years, taken the option of using the military to provide the majority of this cover. The SRR includes the landmass of the UK which is primarily covered by military SAR as well.
If you want as right, riveting read, have a look at the IAMSAR manual - the bible of modern SAR - and note that in volume 1 it states that military assets provide very effective SAR cover due to manpower and poor weather/night capability.
Rumour has it that a major player in the civvySAR world didn't even know what IAMSAR was
Eric - the rescuing of downed/ejected military crews is our primary task but only counts for about 2% of our rescues which are, as you rightly say otherwise civilian in nature.
The UK Search and Rescue Region is enormous, reaching way out into the Atlantic where, for the moment, only the military crews go because we have better range than the S61. The Government is responsible for providing maritime and aeronautical SAR assets in whichever way it sees fit and has, for many years, taken the option of using the military to provide the majority of this cover. The SRR includes the landmass of the UK which is primarily covered by military SAR as well.
If you want as right, riveting read, have a look at the IAMSAR manual - the bible of modern SAR - and note that in volume 1 it states that military assets provide very effective SAR cover due to manpower and poor weather/night capability.
Rumour has it that a major player in the civvySAR world didn't even know what IAMSAR was
Crab.
Only military crews have the range to go out into the Atlantic?? Hmm... down south maybe but not sure Stornoway would agree with you there, even with the S61!
Take your point about the standby hoist but your Wasteland hoist is obviously more reliable than the Goodrich one. We have been more than thankful for the dual fit at least twice. One would have involved a thirty mile hover taxi back to base, with the winchman performing cpr, on a casualty, in a stretcher, on a bloody awful night!! He was well chuffed for the dual hoist, the heave ho would have been impossible!!
Only military crews have the range to go out into the Atlantic?? Hmm... down south maybe but not sure Stornoway would agree with you there, even with the S61!
Take your point about the standby hoist but your Wasteland hoist is obviously more reliable than the Goodrich one. We have been more than thankful for the dual fit at least twice. One would have involved a thirty mile hover taxi back to base, with the winchman performing cpr, on a casualty, in a stretcher, on a bloody awful night!! He was well chuffed for the dual hoist, the heave ho would have been impossible!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Monde
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with the winchman performing cpr, on a casualty, in a stretcher
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab
I AM SAR, U R SAR what’s the difference??
Calli & Northstar are quite correct in what they say in general
It’s not about making a profit by civilianising UK SAR; true, a PFI will make money but the bottom line is the tax payers will pay less for the privilege of having a first class world leading rescue service. At the same time it will give the tax payer or more importantly the MoD more funds to spend on those areas that really need the funds, not expensive second line jobs and associated costs.
Most civilian SAR crews don’t need to visit the Mil SAR bases because they left them in the first place. Yes we too defended our ‘Own Service’ once, but the path to the dark side is strong (not to mention less boll*ks, more cash). I’m sure the Portland/Lee units would be happy for your ‘bird’ to drip some OX38 on dispersal for a few hours while talking shop and cross pollination. You may even get a West Country visit by a 139 in the New Year to see the next generation medium sized aircraft in full SAR fit. ARCCK can watch real time skytrac info of the S92’s up north on a PC or log onto the AIS system…why use a HF sounding like a Dr Who ‘Dalex’ when you can talk on the ‘phone’. Also the S92 out ranges the Sea King now!
Keep up the good work in the meantime as we love the ones that ‘fight/bite/kick and scream’ to the end. Don’t roll over and go belly up on us yet Chivenor, Pprune Rotorheads would be too quiet.
VSF- Have you done SAR or just curious?? I'll let 3D answer that one
I AM SAR, U R SAR what’s the difference??
Calli & Northstar are quite correct in what they say in general
It’s not about making a profit by civilianising UK SAR; true, a PFI will make money but the bottom line is the tax payers will pay less for the privilege of having a first class world leading rescue service. At the same time it will give the tax payer or more importantly the MoD more funds to spend on those areas that really need the funds, not expensive second line jobs and associated costs.
Most civilian SAR crews don’t need to visit the Mil SAR bases because they left them in the first place. Yes we too defended our ‘Own Service’ once, but the path to the dark side is strong (not to mention less boll*ks, more cash). I’m sure the Portland/Lee units would be happy for your ‘bird’ to drip some OX38 on dispersal for a few hours while talking shop and cross pollination. You may even get a West Country visit by a 139 in the New Year to see the next generation medium sized aircraft in full SAR fit. ARCCK can watch real time skytrac info of the S92’s up north on a PC or log onto the AIS system…why use a HF sounding like a Dr Who ‘Dalex’ when you can talk on the ‘phone’. Also the S92 out ranges the Sea King now!
Keep up the good work in the meantime as we love the ones that ‘fight/bite/kick and scream’ to the end. Don’t roll over and go belly up on us yet Chivenor, Pprune Rotorheads would be too quiet.
VSF- Have you done SAR or just curious?? I'll let 3D answer that one
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VSF I will answer your question.
In a normal calm open area scenario, yes I would "double strop".
When I have to get on board a fishing boat in a force 8 and 30ft seas, at night to a crew member below decks in a confined area with no output, who I then have to get back to the upper deck doing CPR as we go, and then get winched to the aircraft, I use a stretcher.
Kind regards
mustfly1
In a normal calm open area scenario, yes I would "double strop".
When I have to get on board a fishing boat in a force 8 and 30ft seas, at night to a crew member below decks in a confined area with no output, who I then have to get back to the upper deck doing CPR as we go, and then get winched to the aircraft, I use a stretcher.
Kind regards
mustfly1
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Monde
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I have to get on board a fishing boat in a force 8 and 30ft seas, at night to a crew member below decks in a confined area with no output, who I then have to get back to the upper deck doing CPR as we go, and then get winched to the aircraft, I use a stretcher.
3D - the most that is stated on the RCS (ask the MCA for a look) for an S61's Radius of Action is 190nm. Ours is 240 nm using very conservative fuel planning that usually gets you back with 1000lbs of fuel so guess who gets to do the long range jobs? Chivenor and Valley regularly refuel in Eire and proceed out to beyond 15 West because the Irish Coastguard also have S61 with limited range. The Navy have a 205nm RoA and regularly refuel in the Scillies on their way out and back. Stornoway is the exception but I believe Lossie still do the longest range ones up there.
The RoA for the S92 isn't on the RCS even though it is claimed to be 290nm or thereabouts - is this a theoretical figure or has it been proved in action?
NRDK - I am not sure how the taxpayer is going to save money by civilianising SAR - it still has to be paid for and, as we have discussed at length, if the equivalent military capability is to be maintained, a lot more training will be required by the civilian crews. Add in the capital costs of all the new aircraft required and the profit margin for the next 30 years and I don't think that SAR provision will get anything other than more expensive - not less.
As for the MoD Budget - a few Sea Kings won't compensate for the ammunition bill for either Iraq or Afghanistan - the crews will still be employed in other areas and the engineers are already being contractorised - where is the saving there then?
You haven't used the HF in a 3A then - it's not perfect but no more daleks. Why should the ARCCK have to use additional kit to track something that was procured for UK SAR? The MCA partitioning machine at work again methinks.
The RoA for the S92 isn't on the RCS even though it is claimed to be 290nm or thereabouts - is this a theoretical figure or has it been proved in action?
NRDK - I am not sure how the taxpayer is going to save money by civilianising SAR - it still has to be paid for and, as we have discussed at length, if the equivalent military capability is to be maintained, a lot more training will be required by the civilian crews. Add in the capital costs of all the new aircraft required and the profit margin for the next 30 years and I don't think that SAR provision will get anything other than more expensive - not less.
As for the MoD Budget - a few Sea Kings won't compensate for the ammunition bill for either Iraq or Afghanistan - the crews will still be employed in other areas and the engineers are already being contractorised - where is the saving there then?
You haven't used the HF in a 3A then - it's not perfect but no more daleks. Why should the ARCCK have to use additional kit to track something that was procured for UK SAR? The MCA partitioning machine at work again methinks.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab
I yield to your grasp of economics and beg you to petition the politicians and prevent them from spending vast sums of money on SAR-H instead of all those current low cost, value for money Mil SAR units. What are they thinking??
The light blue want to play/stay in the game and so will bring over ‘some’ crews (who could/would be better employed in SH now) The whole thing could be ‘civilianised’ albeit using quite a lot of the (‘Ex’) military crews who would be enticed/redundant due to the loss of the UK Mil SAR.
By WE you mean you?? Think you'll find our training is up to the challenge at hand. Besides the extra ex-service crews without the Cranwell lobotomy/chopped at RAF Linton-on-Ouse or Valley ‘SAR god school’ attitude will be welcome additions. Or whatever the present system in the RAF is.
I’ll leave the semantics of who has the ‘biggest one’ out of this for now……that’s ‘range’ I’m talking about! Stornoway can answer that in due course.
Stick to your ‘lightweight’ HF kit, throat mike, WW2 kit if you think it is the way ahead by all means.
Every bit extra in terms of ammo & support that can be squeezed into Iraqmanistan will be appreciated by those at the pointy end IMHO.
‘Keep Fighting’
I yield to your grasp of economics and beg you to petition the politicians and prevent them from spending vast sums of money on SAR-H instead of all those current low cost, value for money Mil SAR units. What are they thinking??
The light blue want to play/stay in the game and so will bring over ‘some’ crews (who could/would be better employed in SH now) The whole thing could be ‘civilianised’ albeit using quite a lot of the (‘Ex’) military crews who would be enticed/redundant due to the loss of the UK Mil SAR.
as we have discussed at length, if the equivalent military capability is to be maintained, a lot more training will be required by the civilian crews.
I’ll leave the semantics of who has the ‘biggest one’ out of this for now……that’s ‘range’ I’m talking about! Stornoway can answer that in due course.
Stick to your ‘lightweight’ HF kit, throat mike, WW2 kit if you think it is the way ahead by all means.
Every bit extra in terms of ammo & support that can be squeezed into Iraqmanistan will be appreciated by those at the pointy end IMHO.
‘Keep Fighting’
NRDK - you do appear have 'ex-RN' written all over you - at least you seem well balanced with an anti-RAF chip on both shoulders. We haven't had an RN exchange officer yet who hasn't had his eyes opened to the way we do SAR - they generally leave rather than return to their mother service
You claim your present training is up to the task in hand and then say you will welcome all the ex-mil crews because they will give you the capability you need - make your mind up.
As for old kit, I would rather have a radar (albeit with a blind arc) that can see a dolphin's c8ck at 10 miles than a cloud and clonk radar that can't see a windfarm at 2.5 miles or see the area you are going to turn into.
On that subject I am still deafened by the silence on the question about how you are allowed to operate below safety alt IMC over water - P.S. approach and landing doesn't count because you are not doing either. Just how do you let down to a radar/PLB/FLIR target safely?
You claim your present training is up to the task in hand and then say you will welcome all the ex-mil crews because they will give you the capability you need - make your mind up.
As for old kit, I would rather have a radar (albeit with a blind arc) that can see a dolphin's c8ck at 10 miles than a cloud and clonk radar that can't see a windfarm at 2.5 miles or see the area you are going to turn into.
On that subject I am still deafened by the silence on the question about how you are allowed to operate below safety alt IMC over water - P.S. approach and landing doesn't count because you are not doing either. Just how do you let down to a radar/PLB/FLIR target safely?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah Crab, thank you
Of course the Dark side is in Black!
The poor old RN boys only spend a dog’s watch on SAR and then some ‘dis-appointer’ sends them packing off to a dull front line job so they run off to Civilian Street and the wage of a Group Captain after a short spell. Probably ex 771 NAS SAR crew, who don’t get a lot of eye opening SAR
, unlike the PWK lot. So yes, easily impressed. Especially by the cushiness of the RAF aircrew life and the way everything is geared to look after the aircrew…the RN are poor cousins in that respect.
I implied perhaps not clearly enough that the usefulness of obtaining experienced ex-mil crews was an asset (as that’s the area that in the past most Civ SAR crews came from) It saves time and money whilst providing a rapid increase in numbers to fill all the vacancies that would be created by the Mil SAR demise, if the powers to be wanted to axe it completely. There would be a need for many crews that wanted to join, we don't have to have you but it is commercially sensible to use a valuable asset, yes even you my crustacean friend, ahh the banter we could have.
As for the new kit appearing nearby to you/now in use up north. Well, full digital moving nautical charts & Aeronautical maps + OS mapping down to 1:25K scale, AIS display so you can see every AIS registered vessel with all the info, all for front and rear crew. Skytrac, forward facing radar, EGPWS, MX-15i FLIR with slaved Nightsun (FLIR can be presented in the cockpit, TCAS, 4 axis A/P (We would have liked NVG but that’s will be a SAR-H perk) blah blah drool!
3D can elaborate on how the front seat crew are able to defied the laws of IMC and get on down to do the job over water (probably with a combination of smoke and mirrors) Some of the ‘Masters’ use the Force.
Must dash now but please don’t let the hook go, the fishing is bloody brilliant here.
The poor old RN boys only spend a dog’s watch on SAR and then some ‘dis-appointer’ sends them packing off to a dull front line job so they run off to Civilian Street and the wage of a Group Captain after a short spell. Probably ex 771 NAS SAR crew, who don’t get a lot of eye opening SAR
, unlike the PWK lot. So yes, easily impressed. Especially by the cushiness of the RAF aircrew life and the way everything is geared to look after the aircrew…the RN are poor cousins in that respect.I implied perhaps not clearly enough that the usefulness of obtaining experienced ex-mil crews was an asset (as that’s the area that in the past most Civ SAR crews came from) It saves time and money whilst providing a rapid increase in numbers to fill all the vacancies that would be created by the Mil SAR demise, if the powers to be wanted to axe it completely. There would be a need for many crews that wanted to join, we don't have to have you but it is commercially sensible to use a valuable asset, yes even you my crustacean friend, ahh the banter we could have.
As for the new kit appearing nearby to you/now in use up north. Well, full digital moving nautical charts & Aeronautical maps + OS mapping down to 1:25K scale, AIS display so you can see every AIS registered vessel with all the info, all for front and rear crew. Skytrac, forward facing radar, EGPWS, MX-15i FLIR with slaved Nightsun (FLIR can be presented in the cockpit, TCAS, 4 axis A/P (We would have liked NVG but that’s will be a SAR-H perk) blah blah drool!
3D can elaborate on how the front seat crew are able to defied the laws of IMC and get on down to do the job over water (probably with a combination of smoke and mirrors) Some of the ‘Masters’ use the Force
. Must dash now but please don’t let the hook go, the fishing is bloody brilliant here.
Last edited by NRDK; 22nd Nov 2007 at 12:49.
NRDK - I am sure the boys at 771 will love you for that but actually our present incumbent is ex-Gannet and he's not going back in a hurry
You make it sound like the only good civsar crews are ex-military which I'm sure will find great favour with many posters here - not!
Frankly AIS sound as much use as ti*ts on a bull for a helicopter - if it's a big boat you will see it using eyes/radar/FLIR and if it's a little boat it won't have AIS. The MCA like it but for SAR use I think it's value is limited.
We have had a 4 axis autopilot for years, nothing new about that and I don't know why you need digital mapping when you rarely venture out of your comfort zone Your Skytrac, as we said, isn't compatible with the rest of the SARF (team game remember) and you forward facing radar is still cloud and clunk, not a proper I band (X band for civvies) maritime radar. TCAS and EGPWS is nice but you wouldn't need the nitesun if you had NVG. FLIR in the cockpit is just one more thing to distract the co-pilot when he should be doing mission management, that's why we leave it to the Radop.
Yes the banter would be good and a bit of suck-back uckers might be fun
The Force may work but is it legal???
You make it sound like the only good civsar crews are ex-military which I'm sure will find great favour with many posters here - not!
Frankly AIS sound as much use as ti*ts on a bull for a helicopter - if it's a big boat you will see it using eyes/radar/FLIR and if it's a little boat it won't have AIS. The MCA like it but for SAR use I think it's value is limited.
We have had a 4 axis autopilot for years, nothing new about that and I don't know why you need digital mapping when you rarely venture out of your comfort zone
Your Skytrac, as we said, isn't compatible with the rest of the SARF (team game remember) and you forward facing radar is still cloud and clunk, not a proper I band (X band for civvies) maritime radar. TCAS and EGPWS is nice but you wouldn't need the nitesun if you had NVG. FLIR in the cockpit is just one more thing to distract the co-pilot when he should be doing mission management, that's why we leave it to the Radop.Yes the banter would be good and a bit of suck-back uckers might be fun
The Force may work but is it legal???
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab....I sensed a nibble
771 do a great job, much like Wattisham & Lee; but there is a certain difference of ‘difficulty’ upgrade at Gannet, Lossie, Stornoway. Those who have done both know it.
Did not say the only good Civ SAR are ex-mil. Many exceptional Civilian only pilots are now in situ. Did infer that market forces Versus time frame will once again mean that you current Mil drivers with a licence, SAR time and a good few hours will be extremely attractive candidates.
With regards the kit fit; it is what the client was offered and wished to pay for, the SA picture that you can obtain is what you up front can only dream about for now. In truth the SK is on its way out…face it, realise it, accept it. You will have to either embrace it as we will or fly for Virgin.
Venture out the comfort zone….Please.
We too hope the EASA/CAA and SAR-H don’t get the bits that count regarding Flying limits, restrictions, dispensations/exemptions etc wrong. Or you will be right that the potential to compromise the level of service may be eroded. We are very aware of this, as we are already hampered to some extent with training limits. As mentioned in previous posts; for Civ SAR ops we have very few, if any restrictions, provided the actions are justifiable.
An Uckers pigmy like yourself would be an 8 piece mixie blob on my doorstep after a few minutes. Never mind, my young apprentice, you too will turn to the dark side in time.
Did not say the only good Civ SAR are ex-mil. Many exceptional Civilian only pilots are now in situ. Did infer that market forces Versus time frame will once again mean that you current Mil drivers with a licence, SAR time and a good few hours will be extremely attractive candidates.
With regards the kit fit; it is what the client was offered and wished to pay for, the SA picture that you can obtain is what you up front can only dream about for now. In truth the SK is on its way out…face it, realise it, accept it. You will have to either embrace it as we will or fly for Virgin.
Venture out the comfort zone….Please.
We too hope the EASA/CAA and SAR-H don’t get the bits that count regarding Flying limits, restrictions, dispensations/exemptions etc wrong. Or you will be right that the potential to compromise the level of service may be eroded. We are very aware of this, as we are already hampered to some extent with training limits. As mentioned in previous posts; for Civ SAR ops we have very few, if any restrictions, provided the actions are justifiable.
An Uckers pigmy like yourself would be an 8 piece mixie blob on my doorstep after a few minutes. Never mind, my young apprentice, you too will turn to the dark side in time.
NRDK - oh dear, not another 'if you haven't done SAR oop North, you haven't done SAR' snob and people call me arrogant
I think I was the one who got the nibble re civvy pilots...
Yup, I'd love to have a new helicopter, but preferably one like the Sea King where you have some options if the MRGB loses all it's oil, unlike the S92.
I have been called an uckers pygmy before, but that was by someone who was good at the game
and people call me arrogantI think I was the one who got the nibble re civvy pilots...
Yup, I'd love to have a new helicopter, but preferably one like the Sea King where you have some options if the MRGB loses all it's oil, unlike the S92.
I have been called an uckers pygmy before, but that was by someone who was good at the game
Yup, I'd love to have a new helicopter, but preferably one like the Sea King where you have some options if the MRGB loses all it's oil, unlike the S92.
That'll be the S61 then?
I knew you would see it our way eventually.
3D - I did say new - your 61's are even older than our Sea Kings