SARH to go
If two crews out of four are declared 24 hours every day how do you get leave weekends etc
when and if you really go down to four crews you will not be carrying out the standby role in the way you do today.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOTD
Thanks for that it is all starting to make sense now and I accept that you will try to achieve it with the 4 crews, as you say it will not be easy and I feel will require some backup. Not quite the way crab portrays it at times. Just for info at present we operate with 4.5 crews that may change soon.
I also can't recall a time when in an emergency a second crew has not been found either when in the military or as a civvy. That is what we do.
Thanks for that it is all starting to make sense now and I accept that you will try to achieve it with the 4 crews, as you say it will not be easy and I feel will require some backup. Not quite the way crab portrays it at times. Just for info at present we operate with 4.5 crews that may change soon.
I also can't recall a time when in an emergency a second crew has not been found either when in the military or as a civvy. That is what we do.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All Over
Age: 61
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
So Sea King ranger isn't as you stated - it's less unless you strip it out then you can achieve the 'Crab spin' range.
The S92 beats the pants of the old Sea King in icing. Very clear on that one and it's faster and has better performance.
The equipment in the aircraft is far superior to the old Sea King.
If you can't see a practical use for the AIS then you really don't know what you're talking about. Especially when they will shortly be putting AIS transponders in to liferafts and life jackets which will give a GPS position for casualties in the water displayed in the aircraft with a geographical picture of all transponding traffic relative to that aircraft overlaid on a moving map. So it not only tells you exactly where the casualty is but you can use it to co-ordinate other vessels and SAR assets. But because you don't have that piece of equipment you dam it as of no practical use and a 'toy'. It's a lifesaver but the great Crab SAR expert can't see it because he doesn’t have it. It really makes you laugh at the amount of rubbish you speak!
You say you have a radalt with audio warnings instead of the EGPWS as if that is the equivalent of a EGPWS. So you clearly don't understand what a EGPWS is.
You'd like to have a FLIR repeater in the aircraft but it would overload the co. Well, perhaps if you hadn't such an antiquated aircraft the co wouldn't be so overloaded and could make use of that and all the other pieces of equipment that are available in the modern SAR world but not your flying museum piece.
And the RAF didn't have FLIR for 20 years after Civy SAR set the standard and you still don't have twin hoist!
So Sea King ranger isn't as you stated - it's less unless you strip it out then you can achieve the 'Crab spin' range.
The S92 beats the pants of the old Sea King in icing. Very clear on that one and it's faster and has better performance.
The equipment in the aircraft is far superior to the old Sea King.
If you can't see a practical use for the AIS then you really don't know what you're talking about. Especially when they will shortly be putting AIS transponders in to liferafts and life jackets which will give a GPS position for casualties in the water displayed in the aircraft with a geographical picture of all transponding traffic relative to that aircraft overlaid on a moving map. So it not only tells you exactly where the casualty is but you can use it to co-ordinate other vessels and SAR assets. But because you don't have that piece of equipment you dam it as of no practical use and a 'toy'. It's a lifesaver but the great Crab SAR expert can't see it because he doesn’t have it. It really makes you laugh at the amount of rubbish you speak!
You say you have a radalt with audio warnings instead of the EGPWS as if that is the equivalent of a EGPWS. So you clearly don't understand what a EGPWS is.
You'd like to have a FLIR repeater in the aircraft but it would overload the co. Well, perhaps if you hadn't such an antiquated aircraft the co wouldn't be so overloaded and could make use of that and all the other pieces of equipment that are available in the modern SAR world but not your flying museum piece.
How did Bristows show us up? They didn't even have paramedic trained winchmen until the RAF set the standard.
And the RAF didn't have FLIR for 20 years after Civy SAR set the standard and you still don't have twin hoist!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: not here
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wtd
Hal
thats what the IPT clarification states. Mil and Civvie become all of '1 company'. Would be slightly divisive otherwise
although pay and conditions will do that anyway
thats what the IPT clarification states. Mil and Civvie become all of '1 company'. Would be slightly divisive otherwise
although pay and conditions will do that anyway
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am hearing on the grapevine that all is not well (again) in the SAR world at the moment. Is there truth in the rumour that the AW139s have stopped doing any night SAR?? and that the S61s have been recalled?
Crab - before you jump on the train - I have also heard that a large number of the RAF Sea Kings are u/s at the moment too....
Is the Navy looking after the UK again??
Crab - before you jump on the train - I have also heard that a large number of the RAF Sea Kings are u/s at the moment too....
Is the Navy looking after the UK again??
267.4fwd - oh yes, your generous offer, which was never made in writing, email or by phone was essentially that I travel at my own expense and in my own time from one end of the country to another just to see your shiny new toy.
I know it has all the bells and whistles and is a capable SAR machine, whether or not it is the best SAR machine will possibly be decided by the winning SARH bidder - it certainly looks like the 139 will be passed over come 2012.
I am not denigrating my civvy SAR pals by defending our present military capability but what you do now is not what you will have to do after 2012.
Lost - I am sure having the EGPWS alerting for terrain, obstacles, bank angle and all the other stuff it can do is wonderful but frankly I suspect at low level you would have to keep muting it or turning it off which rather defeats the object. The good old rad alt has served us very well, we seem to have managed not to crash into things even in very poor weather. The same for TCAS - nice to have but hardly essential in our environment and possibly an unwanted distraction - TDAs and good lookout seem to work for most SAROps.
As for AIS, when all the shipping (of all sizes) and all the liferafts, lifeboats and lifejackets have transponders fitted (although 406 beacons seem just as good)- then it might be a lifesaver. At the moment it is a tool to track ship movements and seems to have spawned some ship-spotters websites. You have it because the MCA like it, not because it is a major tool for SAROPs (except possibly in the MRCC for command and control).
The Sea King range is exactly as I stated and role kit can be removed very quickly. And more importantly the old girl can still get to 240 nm and have enough room for 17 seated survivors.
Who actually controls the FLIR on a FLIR search? I'm betting it's not the co-pilot.
The Sea King is old and has variable serviceability, no-one has ever denied that and the S92 is new and shiny and it should be (and mostly is) streets ahead in terms of performance and safety, otherwise what the hell have Sikorsky and others been doing for the last 50 years. Would I like to have one to do my job? Yes once the lack of ELS is addressed.
Steve oc - define large supercooled droplets - does that mean the sort you get in warmish icing cloud - if so it's not much of an icing clearance and how are you supposed to know how big the droplets that you are hitting are?
Running in - it has not been tested above 3000' DA so there isn't one - I don't think the navy ever saw a reason for an ASW helicopter to operate up there. It doesn't seem to have stopped us getting on with the job though, you just have to go round rather than over.
As for future manning post 2012, the only sensible plan is to blob up all the 66 mil pers in 2 flights from which the Falklands are supported. Mixing crews would be such a management nightmare with all the divisions in working practices, pay, pensions, leave entitlement, OOA dets, extra duties, access to mil support for claims, career progression etc etc not to mention which rules to fly to and who is captain of the aircraft.
Spanish - the RN have aircraft but no crews to fly them. The Sea King 3 fleet has its peaks and troughs of serviceability, the 3A's are much better generally (newer airframes and modernish avionics). What exectly is the problem with the 139 for night jobs?
I know it has all the bells and whistles and is a capable SAR machine, whether or not it is the best SAR machine will possibly be decided by the winning SARH bidder - it certainly looks like the 139 will be passed over come 2012.
I am not denigrating my civvy SAR pals by defending our present military capability but what you do now is not what you will have to do after 2012.
Lost - I am sure having the EGPWS alerting for terrain, obstacles, bank angle and all the other stuff it can do is wonderful but frankly I suspect at low level you would have to keep muting it or turning it off which rather defeats the object. The good old rad alt has served us very well, we seem to have managed not to crash into things even in very poor weather. The same for TCAS - nice to have but hardly essential in our environment and possibly an unwanted distraction - TDAs and good lookout seem to work for most SAROps.
As for AIS, when all the shipping (of all sizes) and all the liferafts, lifeboats and lifejackets have transponders fitted (although 406 beacons seem just as good)- then it might be a lifesaver. At the moment it is a tool to track ship movements and seems to have spawned some ship-spotters websites. You have it because the MCA like it, not because it is a major tool for SAROPs (except possibly in the MRCC for command and control).
The Sea King range is exactly as I stated and role kit can be removed very quickly. And more importantly the old girl can still get to 240 nm and have enough room for 17 seated survivors.
Who actually controls the FLIR on a FLIR search? I'm betting it's not the co-pilot.
The Sea King is old and has variable serviceability, no-one has ever denied that and the S92 is new and shiny and it should be (and mostly is) streets ahead in terms of performance and safety, otherwise what the hell have Sikorsky and others been doing for the last 50 years. Would I like to have one to do my job? Yes once the lack of ELS is addressed.
Steve oc - define large supercooled droplets - does that mean the sort you get in warmish icing cloud - if so it's not much of an icing clearance and how are you supposed to know how big the droplets that you are hitting are?
Running in - it has not been tested above 3000' DA so there isn't one - I don't think the navy ever saw a reason for an ASW helicopter to operate up there. It doesn't seem to have stopped us getting on with the job though, you just have to go round rather than over.
As for future manning post 2012, the only sensible plan is to blob up all the 66 mil pers in 2 flights from which the Falklands are supported. Mixing crews would be such a management nightmare with all the divisions in working practices, pay, pensions, leave entitlement, OOA dets, extra duties, access to mil support for claims, career progression etc etc not to mention which rules to fly to and who is captain of the aircraft.
Spanish - the RN have aircraft but no crews to fly them. The Sea King 3 fleet has its peaks and troughs of serviceability, the 3A's are much better generally (newer airframes and modernish avionics). What exectly is the problem with the 139 for night jobs?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Rest Home for the Elderly
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
139
What you have heard is correct, the teething problems with the 139 continue. The old girl is back to cover the night while the problems are sorted.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Rest Home for the Elderly
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maths
Certainly the intention of the powers that be is to preserve existing levels of standby. It will certainly make it harder to book leave and courses with a smaller pool of people, but 1st and 2nd Standby is likely to continue unchanged except in exceptional circumstances - as has always been the case.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: uk
Age: 66
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Couldn't possibly be the Irish S-61 that flew past Swansea yesterday at around 1730, could it?"
Very likely.
The 139 is not being flown on night rescues and an S61 from Ireland arrived 11Oct to do the night duty.
Very likely.
The 139 is not being flown on night rescues and an S61 from Ireland arrived 11Oct to do the night duty.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sar Aw139 - Not Fit For Service
If an S61 from Ireland has been bought in to cover the night standby, then it must be obvious that the crews who have been flying the AW139 operationally since April consider it not to be safe for night flying.
It will be interesting to see how long the Irish S61 EI-CZN remains at Lee on Solent and indeed what the short term fix will be.
The operators of this aircraft in the SAR mode are not happy, including the Spanish.
Agusta Westland, be prepared for a complete pull out of ALL AW139 SAR aircraft, it really is NOT FIT FOR SERVICE.
After a job on Saturday, the Coastguard seem to be turning a blind eye to whats happening with THEIR aircraft, and insist on typical "Spin"
Solent Coastguard Watch Manager said
In such incidents, speed is of the essence and our new Coastguard helicopter, an AgustaWestland AW139, can provide such a brisk response to these kinds of incidents. Were very grateful to the crew for providing such a rapid response to these sometimes life threatening situations.
The crews manning these aircraft really have had enough of been given the wrong tool to do a job that they love doing.
Will the powers that be take note, give the crews a break from trying their best to "Make It Work" before someone is killed.
Doc
It will be interesting to see how long the Irish S61 EI-CZN remains at Lee on Solent and indeed what the short term fix will be.
The operators of this aircraft in the SAR mode are not happy, including the Spanish.
Agusta Westland, be prepared for a complete pull out of ALL AW139 SAR aircraft, it really is NOT FIT FOR SERVICE.
After a job on Saturday, the Coastguard seem to be turning a blind eye to whats happening with THEIR aircraft, and insist on typical "Spin"
Solent Coastguard Watch Manager said
In such incidents, speed is of the essence and our new Coastguard helicopter, an AgustaWestland AW139, can provide such a brisk response to these kinds of incidents. Were very grateful to the crew for providing such a rapid response to these sometimes life threatening situations.
The crews manning these aircraft really have had enough of been given the wrong tool to do a job that they love doing.
Will the powers that be take note, give the crews a break from trying their best to "Make It Work" before someone is killed.
Doc
And you wonder why I worry about what might happen under SARH. At the moment the problem is confined to just 2 SAR flights but this attitude of sweeping problems under the carpet might affect the whole UK SAR force in the future.
Pretty embarrassing for CHC and the MCA - isn't it an indication of their political stance that instead of going to the ARCCK and asking for mil support (Chiv 2nds cab for instance) they went through CHC and borrowed an asset from a foreign government.
Leopold - it's easy, no courses and an acceptance of the fact that 2nd standby availability might be compromised sometimes
Pretty embarrassing for CHC and the MCA - isn't it an indication of their political stance that instead of going to the ARCCK and asking for mil support (Chiv 2nds cab for instance) they went through CHC and borrowed an asset from a foreign government.
Leopold - it's easy, no courses and an acceptance of the fact that 2nd standby availability might be compromised sometimes
Get in the queue Spanish
Doc - from what I have heard the 139 is fit for purpose but only if you fit it with all the right kit - oh dear.
Doc - from what I have heard the 139 is fit for purpose but only if you fit it with all the right kit - oh dear.
how is this sustainable now with fewer crews?
You're quite right - it won't be easy! The funny thing is that it's a long time since all the flts had 5 full crews, and in fact 4 full crews would be an improvement for at least one flight - so it clearly is possible to manage with 4, even if 5 makes things much easier. I understand that the SAR Force hierarchy is attempting to redress the downsizing (and I hope they succeed), but the reality is that the downsizing is a theoretical move as we've been coping with 4 crews for quite some time.
Doc - I believe it is all the stuff that was promised to be on the aircraft when they arrived - if you make a list of essential kit for night over-water ops then quite a few shortfalls will be on it.
So who is to blame? Manufacturer, Contractor, Sub-contractors, operating authority? Whoever is responsible for putting the aircraft into service in an unfit condition - at least the crews did the right thing by saying enough is enough It's just a shame they had to be put in that position in the first place.
Will SAR post 2012 be this badly managed? You need the proper kit, properly tested and fitted to do SAR, not the future promise of some ill-defined capability that looks good on paper and keeps the accountants happy.
So who is to blame? Manufacturer, Contractor, Sub-contractors, operating authority? Whoever is responsible for putting the aircraft into service in an unfit condition - at least the crews did the right thing by saying enough is enough
It's just a shame they had to be put in that position in the first place.Will SAR post 2012 be this badly managed? You need the proper kit, properly tested and fitted to do SAR, not the future promise of some ill-defined capability that looks good on paper and keeps the accountants happy.