Air ambulance/ Police- winching/ onshore rescue

[Clever Richard]

Crab seems to be getting a lot of stick for giving some sensible advice. What appears to irk his critics the most is the fact he is only basing his advice on many years of experience doing what others currently aspire to, how dare he!

If you don't like advice from the military, ask the civvy experts in the SAR field (ie the boys and girls operating on behalf of the MCA) and I am sure you will get the same message.

[Thomas coupling]

I have had the pleasure of meeting Crab@SAA and I have to say his flying experience and respect by fellow aviators is second to none. He falls down, as many of us do when communicating the message electronically.
Believe me he is very passionate about SAR and knows the trade inside out.
He like many military guys feels threatened by what amounts to a massive upheaval in the industry by a government who really haven't thought this out carefully.
It is policy, it will happen and civilians will dominate the situation. It is the cheaper option and that is all the government care about.

What I would say, especially from a position where I am directly involved in SAR and SAR training, is that it IS a very intensive profession requiring training to the 'nth' degree. Civilians can and will do it, no doubt but ONLY with the correct level of training. There is a wealth of difference between winching a climber off the side of a hill in moderate weather conditions and winching a person off a moving deck in 50+ knots of wind out to sea by 50+ miles.
I would like to see the figures for a 902 in winch mode where the CAT A perf for that machine suggests it can winch train with a pilot and two onboard together with a casualty on the end of the winch with sufficient fuel and still be able to maintain SSE in the hover. And I dont mean 15 mins endurance either.
Either we are talking about comprehensive SAR cover here (albeit inland and coastal) where the 902 can respond in most weather conditions with sufficient fuel to transfer (only the one) patient to a hospital anywhere in its operating region, or we are talking a light twin cab doing some light local work on nice days.
At the end of the day there will always be the need for the heavy guys fully tooled up to do ANY SAR anywhere. And the AA, as much as I adore them, can't and won't.

[griffothefog]

When I worked on AA ops (7 years) we had some of the most challenging terrain in the UK to deal with, and probably managed 90% of extractions without the need for a winch. On the few occasions we could not get the paramedic close enough for effective treatment ( let's not get confused, the primary reason for AA ops is to get medical care to the patient ) we had no hesitation in calling in the guy's from 771. Yep it pricked the pride to sea the big boy's fly off into the distance with "our patient" but at the end of the day the level of skill required to acheive what they provide day in day out is beyond the reasonable budget and requirement of any AA unit. What do the land crews do if they cannot get near a patient on a remote beach? They call the AA unit, NO PRIDE INVOLVED, just common sense. If we could not reach a stranded/fallen cliff walker without putting everyone in danger, we called 771 NO PRIDE INVOLVED.
Maybe our county is unique, but the MOD have had a knack of putting these units in areas where they have been most needed in the past and they have usually got it right. Has something changed since I left the UK?

[Clever Richard]

Thomas Coupling and griffothefog,

Thank you for your posts which are both informed and informative. You have both hit the nail on the head. Crab is passionate and for all the right reasons, if the government can sit back and let others do their work for them for free (ie charity funded AA), they will.

It is the attempt to do what is potentially difficult and extremely dangerous on what will, by necessity of the funding method, be a shoestring that worries many people.

[[email protected]]

TC -








....Now how much do I owe you?

[clearances]

Credit to you all (well most of you)

Hi,

I've read this thread with interest, it's inspiring to read from people who, 1 have a vast knowledge of a topic that I too care about, and 2 are able to keep things mostly professional, without taking personal digs at one another

[whoateallthepies]

Crab
You really are the most pompous, arrogant, high and mighty twit on this thread. You are happy to sling names around so take some of your own.
Itis typical of the blinkered "There's nobody else like us" mentality of the custard-coloured arm of the RAF. And I know, because I've been there. Once you step outside that cloistered environment you realise that lots of other people fly helicopters and to high professional standards on a par with you.

To accuse Flaxton, or any member of YAA of being "amateur" is a gross insult. He proposes to do some day winching over land. Look, me Old, all he has to do is hover the helicopter and follow some "Up, down, left, right, back, forward" directions, something which any professional pilot can do. The only "black art" in winching is hovering over water or moving decks. That is not what he proposes to do, as he has said. And paramedics can be trained for the winch op job, no trouble. My God, even the RN get by with their strange "easy, easy" patter.

By the way, how well does your Sea King hover on one engine at training winching weights? So Civvies operate to a higher safety standard regarding OEI when training? Funny old thing!

Flaxton answered all of your bombastic questions eloquently. It's just a shame that you can't accept that any other outfit than yours should be allowed to winch.
Safe Flying

[Clever Richard]

Clearances,

Looks like you spoke too soon. Somebody does need to calm down, don't they.

Pies, please read Crab's posts again. He is not anti-AA but has the experience that produces a healthy respect for the potential pitfalls involved in winching. He just wants those who take it on to put the training in place for it to be a success.

[whoateallthepies]

Clever Dick
I'm as calm as you like. Always am.
I know he's not anti-AA but I also know he is maligning Flaxton and the Paramedics on YAA without any first-hand knowledge of their operation. He needed to have his pomposity pricked and I hope that has happened, though I doubt it, from reading his previous threads! He will continue on his "Holier than thou" way because he knows only a very narrow, blinkered view of the helicopter world.

Do you seriously think YAA would consider winching without putting the proper training in place?

I have re-read his posts and they are still arrogant!

[[email protected]]

Whoate - you are right that day winching over flat terrain is easy peasy and anyone can do it but that is not what FF is proposing. If the ground were suitable, they would land on to deploy the paramedic as they do now so that means the area must, by definition, be inhospitable.

Many of the likely winching scenarios may be straightforward (a casualty on a steep slope for example) but as the terrain gets more difficult (steeper cliffs, trees, wires etc) and longer lengths of cable are required the game gets harder and an inexperienced crew (eg straight off a winching course where they have been taught basic patter and how to use the winch smoothly) may well get sucked into winching when it is beyond their capabilities.

The one element FF doesn't have in his empire is experience which is why I am concerned that it might go horribly wrong. A CAA approved winching course doesn't give you the experience to deal with operations just as a PPL doesn't give you the ability to deal with IIMC.

I have persisted with this thread because I do have a little insider knowledge of FF's operation but I must protect my sources.

Finally - if you think I am arrogant then you don't know me and if you think I have a narrow, blinkered view of the helicopter world based on limited experience then you really don't know me at all

PS, as you know the Sea King often isn't SSE in the hover when winching but we can take it at risk because we are in the military, the civilians can't because of legislation - one of the reasons we get so much more training done because we don't have to wait for the right wind/weather to practise.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Been away a few days and just caught up. Good to see TC's post - if I read it correctly, he points out that there will always be a need for "heavy", fully capable SAR aircraft and that anything else will be "light and local". Spot on; that's exactly what is being looked-at by YAA.

"Can't and won't" do the stuff SAR do so well; I don't believe anyone in the industry or outside wishes AA to get themselves involved with the offshore malarkey. Onshore, I fully agree that with the current regs there is no possibility of any civvy light twin carrying out Performance Class 1 winch training. Whether that is appropriate in the light of other users'/countries experiences (see http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...postcount=3930) is for the legislators and any interested parties to hammer out. I hope that any decision that emerges is based purely upon achieving the right mix of aviation risk vs the best outcome for patients and not upon old practices, inappropriate ambitions or wishful thinking. I bear in mind as I write this that there are already exemptions (down to Performance Class 3 if required) for HEMS, so it is not inconceivable that a case can be made for similar performance exemptions for use of winches.

Whoate, it can be interesting trying to exchange views with Crab. You and I may well have well over 25 years in more than one field of expertise; we have to remember that some of the folk who look in here from time to time are the ones that taught us over 30 years ago. P'raps if he (Crab) allowed that other contributors have empirical evidence that directly contradicts his perceptions (I refer once again to the "doctors on HEMS aircraft" theme he so strongly opposes) - maybe even showed a touch of humility every now and then - his doubtless-earnest views would be received a bit more coolly. Anyway, get back on convoy where you can count the blats/ enjoy the views.

Crab, I too have insider knowledge of the YAA op and can think of more than one instance where it would have been useful to have a hoist. In this job not a million miles from Sheffield for example:



...where we were able to find an LS thanks to the small footprint of the 902, but then had to subject the crew to a risky trek over the ridge with all the kit. The casualty then had to await a land team for extraction; OK in this case as the injury was (I believe) just lower limb, but factor-in head injuries, exposure or other medical priorities and the extra time needed could've caused serious deterioration in his condition and potential outcome. OK, there's a risk associated with winching - (aviation) risk management vs patient outcome is what HEMS is all about.

As has already been said, if you think that a UK HEMS operator would let loose an under-trained crew under the circumstances you describe and expect them to cope then you have a terribly inaccurate picture of what we (including ex-mil SAR instructors and examiners) do.

[JimL]

Thud_and_Blunder,

I bear in mind as I write this that there are already exemptions (down to Performance Class 3 if required) for HEMS, so it is not inconceivable that a case can be made for similar performance exemptions for use of winches.

As I said in an earlier post, that is already the case.

The HEC Class D (not Cat A - there is no such thing) for training is a UK policy thing - it is not required by JARs. Other States in Europe do not specify this for training; it could be classified at HEC Class B (provided all members of the of the training crew are company employees) which does not require the same performance criteria.

What does come as a surprise is the statement that none of these small twins can meet the HEC Class D performance requirement; I'm sure they can as all of them have been used for Marine Pilot transfer - for which the requirement applies.

Jim

[Vie sans frontieres]

Credit to you all (well most of you)
Hi,

I've read this thread with interest, it's inspiring to read from people who, 1 have a vast knowledge of a topic that I too care about, and 2 are able to keep things mostly professional, without taking personal digs at one another

followed immediately by

Crab
You really are the most pompous, arrogant, high and mighty twit on this thread.

Comic timing of the highest order. Ronnie Barker couldn't have delivered it better.

By the way. Crab's right. And if a winch had been attached to the aircraft in the picture shown, I certainly don't think the winching would've fallen into the 'straightforward' category that Flaxton et al are suggesting that YAA would restrict their winching to. All manner of things could go wrong down that slope (if it's at all like the one on the other side of the valley).

[Thud_and_Blunder]

By the way. Crab's right.

Ah well, that's it - discussion's over in the face of such irrefutable logic!

I certainly don't think the winching would've fallen into the 'straightforward' category that Flaxton et al are suggesting that YAA would restrict their winching to. All manner of things could go wrong down that slope (if it's at all like the one on the other side of the valley).

Again, I defer to your expert knowledge. Silly me, as the person at the controls of the aircraft you see in the picture who'd just done the recce's and dropped off the crew, to think that I should know enough about winching to think it might've helped here. Plain to see that the situation can be analysed much more effectively from one terrestrial perspective - fancy me not realising that sooner, eh? I shall go and beat myself over the head with my logbooks 'til I see sense. Ooops, nearly forgot -

[[email protected]]

Thud - the fact that the only example you use to justify the need for a winch did not in fact require one to get the job done and would not have met the need to winch given the casualty's condition speaks volumes for the weakness of the argument put forward to justify AA winching in the first place.

It's full of 'could haves' and 'what ifs' and is hardly an operational justification for the extra cost and risk involved - merely an aspiration.

Who exactly is going to stop poor decision making regarding winching? FF with his extensive experience (is he the senior pilot at YAA?) Once the course has been passed, the CAA will go away happy and there will be no-one to supervise the winching.

I love the accusation of arrogance since all I have done is try to highlight some potential pitfalls of putting inexperienced crews in difficult positions - is it not more arrogant that FF and others see absolutely no merit in any of my suggestions or advice? You decide. BTW are you flying with A&E consultants on every AA yet?

[Vie sans frontieres]

Thud

Well you yourself described it as a "risky trek over the ridge", which suggests that there would've been all sorts of complexities awaiting your paramedics if they'd deployed by winch. You're falling into the common PPRuNe trap of only viewing it from the pilot's perspective. You'll learn...the hard way.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

This is fun.

that the only example you use to justify the need for a winch

Crab, extrapolating an opponent's argument ad infinitum ad nauseam might've been amusing in Year 4 but hardly cuts the mustard here. Making out that the one job for which I have provided a picture is the entire case for AA winching is a bit of a desperate shot.

not have met the need to winch given the casualty's condition

Ah, if only we knew before launch what the job was going to entail - how simple life would be, eh? Sadly we mere mortals are not prescient and therefore don't know exactly which piece of kit is going to be needed until we arrive on scene. Using your line of argument (careful, Thud, don't extrapolate...) we'd have to assume that every job in Yorkshire required the full SAR capabilities of the Leccy crew and we might as well hand the AA money back to the public and go home.

Who exactly is going to stop poor decision making regarding winching

and

there will be no-one to supervise the winching

. You seem here to indicate that you believe that the world outside the military has no knowledge of, or use for, standardisation, continuous training and periodic mandatory assessment of ability. Is that a fair assessment of your comments? If so, you may well be surprised to find that the reality is somewhat different. Back in post #96 you said that you'd be happy if Bertie's organisation was doing the study and would run the show. Well guess what - they're all part of the same operation, and all assessed to the same standard.

is it not more arrogant that FF and others see absolutely no merit in any of my suggestions or advice?

Best idea here is go back to FF's post #83 and re-read from where he says "So let’s look at this “stinky” plan". See once again how he explains slowly and clearly that an appropriately qualified and experienced external contractor is putting together a staged, continuously monitored and assessed programme which will meet or surpass all of your requirements. Then ignore it all anyway and accuse him of arrogance (or better yet, surprise us and actually acknowledge what was there in front of you all along).

Vie, "risky trek over the edge" down 15-20 feet (from memory) to a ledge where you could've held Chivenor's OM Summer Ball in the days when they used to have them (note to self - stop exaggerating). You decide: would a winch allow a much safer delivery of paramedic and kit to patient than having them struggle down the slope? I have an opinion and I bet you can guess what it is. See that building to the right of the rotor head? That was the nearest road access - the team that ended up carrying the patient had to lug him all that way, 'cos the aircraft had to go home as pumpkin time would've been and gone by the time they'd reached the casualty and brought him somewhere the aircraft could've picked him up. OK in this case - not good if his condition was significantly different, eh?

You are quite right about seeing it from a pilot's perspective; however, if in all my time (doing anything from Sea-State 5 CT roping-then-winching with a Chinook through situation winching a third of the way up a wadi in a single-engine Huey through to SAR examining in Borneo... blah, blah swing-lantern-pull-up-sandbag) I had never learned to see things the way my winch-op, winch-man or even diver(!) saw them then I reckon you'd probably have a point. As it is, you don't - in my opinion - although I agree that I'll learn. The day I stop learning is the day I stop flying. Oh, and do I get a prize for the unwieldiest "sentence" on PPRuNe to date with that first one in this paragraph?

To summarise:

An AA unit is undertaking a project to further their ability to improve patient outcomes by expanding the operational capability of their crews and aircraft. People in a near-equivalent military operation and elsewhere have expressed concern; their concerns have been addressed in detail both by the unit directly involved and by other interested parties. Those expressing concern are still not convinced, and are therefore right. I thengyew.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Crab, sorry to have missed this bit:

BTW are you flying with A&E consultants on every AA yet?

No, not yet - and not until it becomes appropriate. Mind you, had an interesting job in the Midlands last week where my 2 paramedics were first on scene but we had to wait for the TWO docs who came in the next aircraft before the patient's outcome started to significantly improve. No pricked pride etc, just the right people in the right place to get the job done. Get the right selection process, the right clinical governance and the right funding and you really have nothing to fear, honest!

[XV666]

T & B,



Crab,

Maybe you could stand back and look at why there seem to be so many who see your posts as "arrogant" ?

Have you thought how insulting you can be (and often are), when you strongly imply that a professional organisation would not continue with their standards and training, once approved by the CAA? How would you take such an accusation aimed at your SAR Op? You'd be understandably aggrieved/angry/p'd off if someone suggested that the RAF couldn't be trusted to maintain their standards, once approved: no?

And it has been pointed out already, you have an advantage of not requiring SSE at all times, yet have a fair pop at those who are constrained by civil regs to operate HEC Class D for training. See the reason why you come across to many of us as just a tad arrogant, or out of touch with the civ world?

[clearances]

A little too soon...

Vie,

Comical timing alright... I'm not sure why things digress to such a point? This stuff we call winching is not sacred and with quality training you would be surprised who can operate a hoist safely.

Over water at night, pitching and heaving deck... completely different!