SARH to go
If the RAF were to provide that level of service at a price cheaper than civvy, why aren't they?
This is the one of the main bones of contention for Crab and his cohorts - the RAF/RN SAR effort was never costed, in case (many of us believe) SAR-H turned out to be more expensive. The previous RAF SAR Force commander drew up a theoretical plan for the RAF/RN to keep providing SAR (including Falklands and Cyprus, neither of which features in SAR-H - extra costs which the MOD will have to fund somehow) but his proposals were swept under the carpet with indecent haste - not because they were pie-in-the-sky, but because again it risked exposing SAR-H for the white elephant which many believe it is. Had the mil option been properly examined and been proved to be inferior (either in terms of cost, which is quite possible, or in terms of service, which is unlikely), Crab would no doubt give in graciously.
As it is, noone knows for sure how SAR-H compares to the present structure in terms of cost, so the two camps (ie pro-mil and anti-mil) remain implacably opposed.
Why will the service be any less in the future when we are reducing 24hr cover to 12 hr on a daily basis at all bases due to lack of personnel
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South Coast
Age: 79
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing new as many of you have been advocating just this. Not exactly helpful though.
In todays Daily Mail financial section.
Spr
In todays Daily Mail financial section.
RBS role in PFI bid raises conflict fears
Last updated at 10:36 PM on 30th November 2009
It is down to a shootout between two consortia - the Air Knight group, which comprises VT Group, Lockheed Martin and British International Helicopters, and the Soteria group, which includes Thales, CHC and RBS. RBS was drafted in to Soteria in March 2008, long before the Edinburgh lender was bailed out by the Government, which now owns 84pc.
But as the decision on the mega MoD contract draws closer, concerns are beginning to emerge about how impartial officials will be when awarding the contract.
One industry source said: 'It is not beyond the wit of man to see there is a vested interest there.'
The situation evokes memories of the furore that erupted when QinetiQ was handed the £12bn Defence Training Review contract.
At the time the government still held a 19pc stake in QinetiQ, makingit both the biggest shareholder in the firm and its biggest customer.
While the parallels are obvious, a source close to Soteria dismissed the issue, saying: 'They (the Government) will be looking at who has the best bid and who has the most cost-effective bid.' Those left in the competition were told a preferred bidder would be appointed by the end of the year. But this timetable looks as though it has slipped and participants are now expecting a decision early in the new year.
One source said MoD officials met on November 13, when they were meant to 'close dialogue' on the contract. This would then give the bidders two weeks to work up their final bids.
But the source added: 'They didn't close dialogue and confirmation of invitation to tender has not happened. So it would seem to be an indication that it will drag on into the new year.'
An MoD spokesman said the decision to appoint a preferred bidder had not been made and was not likely to be made 'for a while'.
He added: 'We are taking forward the PFI competition through a process of dialogue and review.
'A preferred bidder will be appointed when an appropriately mature solution has been established and selected through the competitive process.'
Last updated at 10:36 PM on 30th November 2009
- One of the Government's biggest private-finance contracts is tipped to be handed to a consortium backed by taxpayer-funded Royal Bank of Scotland, raising concerns of a conflict of interests.
It is down to a shootout between two consortia - the Air Knight group, which comprises VT Group, Lockheed Martin and British International Helicopters, and the Soteria group, which includes Thales, CHC and RBS. RBS was drafted in to Soteria in March 2008, long before the Edinburgh lender was bailed out by the Government, which now owns 84pc.
But as the decision on the mega MoD contract draws closer, concerns are beginning to emerge about how impartial officials will be when awarding the contract.
One industry source said: 'It is not beyond the wit of man to see there is a vested interest there.'
The situation evokes memories of the furore that erupted when QinetiQ was handed the £12bn Defence Training Review contract.
At the time the government still held a 19pc stake in QinetiQ, makingit both the biggest shareholder in the firm and its biggest customer.
While the parallels are obvious, a source close to Soteria dismissed the issue, saying: 'They (the Government) will be looking at who has the best bid and who has the most cost-effective bid.' Those left in the competition were told a preferred bidder would be appointed by the end of the year. But this timetable looks as though it has slipped and participants are now expecting a decision early in the new year.
One source said MoD officials met on November 13, when they were meant to 'close dialogue' on the contract. This would then give the bidders two weeks to work up their final bids.
But the source added: 'They didn't close dialogue and confirmation of invitation to tender has not happened. So it would seem to be an indication that it will drag on into the new year.'
An MoD spokesman said the decision to appoint a preferred bidder had not been made and was not likely to be made 'for a while'.
He added: 'We are taking forward the PFI competition through a process of dialogue and review.
'A preferred bidder will be appointed when an appropriately mature solution has been established and selected through the competitive process.'
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as how this is a rumour network.....
I have heard a rumour...from a mate down the pub who heard it from his wife who heard it from her neighbours cockatoo.... that a third bidder may be about to (re)surface.....
...ok the cockatoo bit was made up
I have heard a rumour...from a mate down the pub who heard it from his wife who heard it from her neighbours cockatoo.... that a third bidder may be about to (re)surface.....
...ok the cockatoo bit was made up
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Where the sun shines
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<H1>From Mail Online:
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1232488/For-sale-sign-hovers-CHC-arm.html#ixzz0YVCiNEH5
</H1>
For sale sign hovers over helicopter firm CHC's Australian arm
By Karl West
Last updated at 12:03 AM on 02nd December 2009Helicopter firm CHC has quietly put its Australian search and rescue business up for sale while bidding for an identical £5billion contract to run Britain's coastal rescue business.
CHC has appointed ANZ, the Australian and New Zealand bank, to tout the Aussie search and rescue (SAR) business around prospective buyers.
ANZ has drafted an information memorandum, seen by the Daily Mail, which has been sent out to a number of international companies.
The helicopter firm is aiming to land a £5bn deal in the UK
It comes as the Ministry of Defence is about to appoint a preferred bidder to run Britain's search and rescue operations for the next 20 to 30 years. The PFI deal is currently down to two consortia - AirKnight and Soteria, which includes CHC, Thales and Royal Bank of Scotland.
A defence industry source claimed the MoD would be sure to question why CHC is selling off its SAR business in Australia and what this says about its commitment to the UK contract.
More...The source said the timing of the sale was remarkable, coming just before a preferred operator is to be named. He added: 'It has clearly raised puzzled expressions.'
CHC admitted it is currently 'reviewing its non-oil and gas operations in Australia', which includes air ambulance, police and search and rescue.
It added: 'CHC is totally committed to the UK SAR contract ... search and rescue is one of CHC's core markets.'
CHC was bought by private equity outfit First Reserve in February 2008. First is a big investor in the energy sector and was attracted to CHC principally for its involvement in ferrying oil and gas workers to offshore platforms.
The information memorandum says CHC's Australian SAR operation has '22 specialised aircraft, employs 191 staff (including 60 pilots and 33 engineers) and operates from 13 bases across mainland Australia'.
It also points out the potential for 'growth opportunities', including further SAR outsourcing contracts, adding: 'These may be available in the medium term and relate to the outsourcing of government and communications operations including both civilian and defence contracts.
'Outsourcing of these contracts is part of a longer-term trend within the industry to move towards specialised operators, replacing government or communityoperated aircraft.'
An MoD spokesman said: 'We are conducting a competition for the provision of the future UK search and rescue helicopter capability. Any decision by CHC regarding their business in Australia is a matter for them.'
By Karl West
Last updated at 12:03 AM on 02nd December 2009Helicopter firm CHC has quietly put its Australian search and rescue business up for sale while bidding for an identical £5billion contract to run Britain's coastal rescue business.
CHC has appointed ANZ, the Australian and New Zealand bank, to tout the Aussie search and rescue (SAR) business around prospective buyers.
ANZ has drafted an information memorandum, seen by the Daily Mail, which has been sent out to a number of international companies.
The helicopter firm is aiming to land a £5bn deal in the UK It comes as the Ministry of Defence is about to appoint a preferred bidder to run Britain's search and rescue operations for the next 20 to 30 years. The PFI deal is currently down to two consortia - AirKnight and Soteria, which includes CHC, Thales and Royal Bank of Scotland.
A defence industry source claimed the MoD would be sure to question why CHC is selling off its SAR business in Australia and what this says about its commitment to the UK contract.
More...The source said the timing of the sale was remarkable, coming just before a preferred operator is to be named. He added: 'It has clearly raised puzzled expressions.'
CHC admitted it is currently 'reviewing its non-oil and gas operations in Australia', which includes air ambulance, police and search and rescue.
It added: 'CHC is totally committed to the UK SAR contract ... search and rescue is one of CHC's core markets.'
CHC was bought by private equity outfit First Reserve in February 2008. First is a big investor in the energy sector and was attracted to CHC principally for its involvement in ferrying oil and gas workers to offshore platforms.
The information memorandum says CHC's Australian SAR operation has '22 specialised aircraft, employs 191 staff (including 60 pilots and 33 engineers) and operates from 13 bases across mainland Australia'.
It also points out the potential for 'growth opportunities', including further SAR outsourcing contracts, adding: 'These may be available in the medium term and relate to the outsourcing of government and communications operations including both civilian and defence contracts.
'Outsourcing of these contracts is part of a longer-term trend within the industry to move towards specialised operators, replacing government or communityoperated aircraft.'
An MoD spokesman said: 'We are conducting a competition for the provision of the future UK search and rescue helicopter capability. Any decision by CHC regarding their business in Australia is a matter for them.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1232488/For-sale-sign-hovers-CHC-arm.html#ixzz0YVCiNEH5
</H1>
Last edited by SafetyCase; 2nd Dec 2009 at 03:45.
There is a rumour that Soteria were tipped the wink that if they could drop their bid by a few million they would be e shoe0in for the contract - would this explain the delay???
A govt contract where the govt is underwriting the company and its banks - what could possibly go wrong???
A govt contract where the govt is underwriting the company and its banks - what could possibly go wrong???
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the Country
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But RBS aren't backing the bid financially, they claim. My understanding was that they are providing the experience of PFI that CHC and Thales need to make it work, although given Thales experience, you'd think they wouldn't need RBS, hmmm 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Daily Mail article & photograph
Good to see the Daily Mail maintaining its standards of reporting.
Unless my eyes deceive me, the helicopter pictured is in Bristow colours and looks very much like one of their IAC S92s operating out of Scatsta.
Unless my eyes deceive me, the helicopter pictured is in Bristow colours and looks very much like one of their IAC S92s operating out of Scatsta.
Good to see the Daily Mail maintaining its standards of reporting
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torque
Lies, damned lies and statistics as someone once put it. I think you will find on close scrutiny (if your source is DASA) that when they say "23% of UK SAR callouts are coastal" they actually mean "23% of UK (Military) SAR (Helicopter) callouts are coastal". Their figures are based on the 8 military SAR helicopter bases and do not include the 4 MCA/CHC bases which are usually tagged on at the end of the report in a different format.
However, given the time of year, perhaps we should be charitable to Mr West when he refers to Britain's coastal rescue business. Most of the UK SAR helicopters bases are located on the coast or within a mile or two of it - and the remainder are not very far inland. Mr West is, therefore, geographically correct when he talks of Britain's coastal rescue business. I am led to believe that nearly all the existing bases will remain exactly where they are post 2012 so it looks like we will continue to have a coastal rescue business for some years to come
However, given the time of year, perhaps we should be charitable to Mr West when he refers to Britain's coastal rescue business. Most of the UK SAR helicopters bases are located on the coast or within a mile or two of it - and the remainder are not very far inland. Mr West is, therefore, geographically correct when he talks of Britain's coastal rescue business. I am led to believe that nearly all the existing bases will remain exactly where they are post 2012 so it looks like we will continue to have a coastal rescue business for some years to come
Last edited by Bluenose 50; 3rd Dec 2009 at 01:30. Reason: too many istics in statistisiscts
Bluenose - what are the coastal/inland stats for the MCA flights then? Post 2012 with NVG and new JAR rules (allegedly) all flights will have the low level night overland capability and will probably be tasked accordingly.
Pratt and Whitney insist on daily compressor washes on their engines when operated in a coastal environment. The Canadian manufacturers class the whole of the UK as "coastal" !
Bluenose,
You're absolutely right to say that
but, as Crab points out, adding in the MCA stats wouldn't make much difference - pushing the coastal total up to 30-35% or so (at a guess) doesn't change my point.
I disagree that we should describe SAR as a coastal rescue business just because
Surely one could argue that the bases are on/near the coast to be a compromise between all the maritime jobs and all the land jobs! Your logic would conclude that nuclear power stations chiefly supply electricity to remote communities just because they happen to be in the middle of nowhere!
You're absolutely right to say that
they actually mean "23% of UK (Military) SAR (Helicopter) callouts are coastal"
I disagree that we should describe SAR as a coastal rescue business just because
Most of the UK SAR helicopters bases are located on the coast
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Crab
Good job in the Lakes. Despite recent difficulties reported elsewhere and in which you have my sympathy, once again when the chips were down SARF and ARCC came up with the goods.
Apologies for the late response – I’ve been busy ! I don’t have the coastal/inland breakdown for MCA flights as I am not a statistician and am only a humble foot soldier. However, the good news is that MCA flights are doing inland jobs and that brings me on to your second point.
You’re absolutely correct, post 2012 all UK SAR flights will operate to the same standards and will be available to deal with incidents on land, at sea (including the coast) or in the air. Long overdue if I may say so and if all goes according to plan, tasking & prioritisation will be based on the greatest need and not on the old chestnuts of
· Ejected fast jet jocks are always at the top of the queue (Military)
· Maritime task mainly takes precedence over any other task (MCA)
· NHS patients with life threatening illnesses needing to be moved to a specialist hospital are secondary or tertiary tasks
The above comments are, of course, only a personal opinion but it is one long held and is one of the main reasons why I think that SARH is not a bad thing. The taxpayer ultimately will fund UKSARH and prioritisation of tasking should only be based on who needs it most – civilian or military, mountaineer, sailor or NHS patient who needs to get to better NHS facilities when the NHS can’t achieve that using their own resources.
Hi Torque
Witty response about nuclear power stations, I think ..... However, at my time of life, logic doesn’t exist in the wee small hours and I was trying to inject a light-hearted touch into what sometimes appears to be very polarised arguments. Obviously I skied my shot over the cross bar.
Statistics
Number crunching has never been my specialist subject but I’m working on it. The point I was trying to make was that all stats need to be handled with caution and a Gucci pie-chart, however colourful, may only represent what the author/originator wanted to it to prove in the first place. More on this later once I’ve dusted down the abacus. Don't wait up - could be a day or two.
Good job in the Lakes. Despite recent difficulties reported elsewhere and in which you have my sympathy, once again when the chips were down SARF and ARCC came up with the goods.
Apologies for the late response – I’ve been busy ! I don’t have the coastal/inland breakdown for MCA flights as I am not a statistician and am only a humble foot soldier. However, the good news is that MCA flights are doing inland jobs and that brings me on to your second point.
You’re absolutely correct, post 2012 all UK SAR flights will operate to the same standards and will be available to deal with incidents on land, at sea (including the coast) or in the air. Long overdue if I may say so and if all goes according to plan, tasking & prioritisation will be based on the greatest need and not on the old chestnuts of
· Ejected fast jet jocks are always at the top of the queue (Military)
· Maritime task mainly takes precedence over any other task (MCA)
· NHS patients with life threatening illnesses needing to be moved to a specialist hospital are secondary or tertiary tasks
The above comments are, of course, only a personal opinion but it is one long held and is one of the main reasons why I think that SARH is not a bad thing. The taxpayer ultimately will fund UKSARH and prioritisation of tasking should only be based on who needs it most – civilian or military, mountaineer, sailor or NHS patient who needs to get to better NHS facilities when the NHS can’t achieve that using their own resources.
Hi Torque
Witty response about nuclear power stations, I think ..... However, at my time of life, logic doesn’t exist in the wee small hours and I was trying to inject a light-hearted touch into what sometimes appears to be very polarised arguments. Obviously I skied my shot over the cross bar.
Statistics
Number crunching has never been my specialist subject but I’m working on it. The point I was trying to make was that all stats need to be handled with caution and a Gucci pie-chart, however colourful, may only represent what the author/originator wanted to it to prove in the first place. More on this later once I’ve dusted down the abacus. Don't wait up - could be a day or two.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bertie
"The Canadian manufacturers class the whole of the UK as "coastal" !"
Something along the lines I was trying to explain - we are an island race after all. Your support is appreciated whether that was what you intended or not
Something along the lines I was trying to explain - we are an island race after all. Your support is appreciated whether that was what you intended or not
Bluenose - the old chestnut of a FJ ejectee coming first may still be technically true but is almost statistically irrelevant against the rest of the gamut of SAR jobs. In the old days of Lightnings, Phantoms et al we had a significant number to deal with every year - now it is more like one a year (fortunately).
Post 2012 the ARCC will still be coordinating SAR assets and they will still be the ones tasking you to inland jobs so their assessment of priority will still be extant.
I'm not sure that the 'same standard' will be achieved immediately post 2012 because the 4 MCA flights will have to jump through all the hoops of NVG training and practise - if the CAA actually get round to legislating for it.
The taxpayer will ultimately fund UKSAR but they do that already - the main difference is that some of that tax will go straight to profit and shareholders dividends, how can that be good value for money?
Post 2012 the ARCC will still be coordinating SAR assets and they will still be the ones tasking you to inland jobs so their assessment of priority will still be extant.
I'm not sure that the 'same standard' will be achieved immediately post 2012 because the 4 MCA flights will have to jump through all the hoops of NVG training and practise - if the CAA actually get round to legislating for it.
The taxpayer will ultimately fund UKSAR but they do that already - the main difference is that some of that tax will go straight to profit and shareholders dividends, how can that be good value for money?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab
Good morning.
I’m aware of the figures – but the old chestnut still gets dragged out on occasions. Post 2012 it will finally be buried - I hope. I wasn’t being flippant about ejectees who as you are very aware require specialist handling – it’s just that I heard on numerous occasions that his or her needs (hypothetically speaking) would always take priority regardless of who else was in difficulty without any thought being given to who was in greater danger.
Post 2012 the ARCC will not be tasking me to inland jobs because I am keeping my feet firmly on the ground. They will not be tasking MCA helicopters to inland jobs because there will not be any “MCA” helicopters as I understand it. They will be however be tasking UKSAR Helicopters – for lack of a better name at the mo – wherever they are required. That’s fine by me.
Post 2012 ARCC will be still be tasking SAR aircraft – who “co-ordinates” them depends on who is co-ordinating the overall incident. If it is a maritime or coastal job, the chances are that a Coastguard Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centre will be co-ordinating the SAR helicopter (along with any other assets – air or surface - that have responded to the incident).
When I talked of the same standard I meant they will all, ultimately, be the same aircraft, same capability, same kit, same training etc as opposed to the set up at the moment where there are 5 different types of helicopter operating around the UK – with different speeds and capabilities. Some have thermal imaging some don’t, some have twin hoist some don’t, some are flown with NVG and some do not, some can multi home on 121.5 MHz and some can’t, etc. Apart from all the other benefits that standardisation brings, it will greatly assist ARCC in SAR helicopter selection in the future.
Good morning.
I’m aware of the figures – but the old chestnut still gets dragged out on occasions. Post 2012 it will finally be buried - I hope. I wasn’t being flippant about ejectees who as you are very aware require specialist handling – it’s just that I heard on numerous occasions that his or her needs (hypothetically speaking) would always take priority regardless of who else was in difficulty without any thought being given to who was in greater danger.
Post 2012 the ARCC will not be tasking me to inland jobs because I am keeping my feet firmly on the ground. They will not be tasking MCA helicopters to inland jobs because there will not be any “MCA” helicopters as I understand it. They will be however be tasking UKSAR Helicopters – for lack of a better name at the mo – wherever they are required. That’s fine by me.
Post 2012 ARCC will be still be tasking SAR aircraft – who “co-ordinates” them depends on who is co-ordinating the overall incident. If it is a maritime or coastal job, the chances are that a Coastguard Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centre will be co-ordinating the SAR helicopter (along with any other assets – air or surface - that have responded to the incident).
When I talked of the same standard I meant they will all, ultimately, be the same aircraft, same capability, same kit, same training etc as opposed to the set up at the moment where there are 5 different types of helicopter operating around the UK – with different speeds and capabilities. Some have thermal imaging some don’t, some have twin hoist some don’t, some are flown with NVG and some do not, some can multi home on 121.5 MHz and some can’t, etc. Apart from all the other benefits that standardisation brings, it will greatly assist ARCC in SAR helicopter selection in the future.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab@SAA: Have you read up on Vision 2020? It says it all, I'm afraid. The decision to take us all in this direction was made nearly a decade ago. [SAR-H is the least of your worries!].
As the Chief of the MCA said at the opening of the latest SAR Conference in Valley (why weren't you there?):
You are either with us or against us, there is NO GOING BACK. So stop bleating ...please. Embrace change and find something constructive to say about it. It is the future - your 'golden age' is over...it is now the golden age for all the newbies on the block. Change happens, stop being a dinosaur - you are part of a dying breed, jump ship or go down with her.
Decision for preferred bidder has gone to early Jan 2010. My guess is another delay until June.
As the Chief of the MCA said at the opening of the latest SAR Conference in Valley (why weren't you there?):
You are either with us or against us, there is NO GOING BACK. So stop bleating ...please. Embrace change and find something constructive to say about it. It is the future - your 'golden age' is over...it is now the golden age for all the newbies on the block. Change happens, stop being a dinosaur - you are part of a dying breed, jump ship or go down with her.
Decision for preferred bidder has gone to early Jan 2010. My guess is another delay until June.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In The Trap, trapped.....
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Money, Money, Money, we are all taxpayers!
Crab,
Like I mentioned in post 1241, re pensions costs etc, I suppose what the taxpayer saves on your and others pensions or savings on Boarding School Allowances, a little might find its way into the pockets of some shareholder. In fact if you bought shares in the winning company you could get double your pension, now there is a thought!
As for NVG, do you start SARF as a NVG guru or do you have to learn like everyone else? Yes there are a few out there with 100s of goggle hours but there will also be those in civsar with 100s too. My guess is anyone with NVG instructional time might be head hunted to provide a suitable base intro to NVG, my guess is a lot of civsar have flown on NVG before….no?......and they wouldn’t necessarily need to be yellow! Green, grey, red and grey?
Coastal or Inland, I guess you go where you are tasked. Nowhere in the UK is more than 65 Nm (30mins) from the coast! We ARE a COASTAL nation.
Senior Trooper – “why wasn’t Crab@ the SAR conf?” Too busy hustling on pprune I’d guess………..
Pas.
Ps Well done to HMS Gannet SAR Flight for another year in the record books, 400+ call-outs and still 4 weeks to go. I guess there aren’t many inflatables off Chivenor these days.
Like I mentioned in post 1241, re pensions costs etc, I suppose what the taxpayer saves on your and others pensions or savings on Boarding School Allowances, a little might find its way into the pockets of some shareholder. In fact if you bought shares in the winning company you could get double your pension, now there is a thought!
As for NVG, do you start SARF as a NVG guru or do you have to learn like everyone else? Yes there are a few out there with 100s of goggle hours but there will also be those in civsar with 100s too. My guess is anyone with NVG instructional time might be head hunted to provide a suitable base intro to NVG, my guess is a lot of civsar have flown on NVG before….no?......and they wouldn’t necessarily need to be yellow! Green, grey, red and grey?
Coastal or Inland, I guess you go where you are tasked. Nowhere in the UK is more than 65 Nm (30mins) from the coast! We ARE a COASTAL nation.
Senior Trooper – “why wasn’t Crab@ the SAR conf?” Too busy hustling on pprune I’d guess………..
Pas.
Ps Well done to HMS Gannet SAR Flight for another year in the record books, 400+ call-outs and still 4 weeks to go. I guess there aren’t many inflatables off Chivenor these days.
Why wasn't I at the SARF conference? Oh yes, I remember I was on shift
My attendance had to be cancelled at the last minute due to shift plot faffs.
Senior Trooper - it's not a question of moving on from a golden age, all things change - I accept that as part of life. But when you get to my age and have seen some of the 'changes' that have been implemented, for what seems like all good reasons at the time, but are often the result of 'empire building' and ambitious individuals rather than through a real need for change, one can be rather cynical about claims made to support such change.
Unfortunately the senior guys in the MCA know very little about helicopter SAR - strangely enough the main reason the MoD got involved with SARH - and that attitude of 'with us or against us' is not the way forward. The MCA care about things maritime and coastal, as they should, but have minimal experience of inland/mountain/urban SAR - SARH helicopters will be tasked to lots of stuff the big MCA don't understand so they need to bring that experience into play not alienate it.
Pasptoo - there is lots of NVG experience out there, some relevant, some not - some current, some not - but in order to operate safely and with no loss of capability, a robust, well structured and monitored training scheme will be required and there is not a huge time frame available to organise it. Time spent on goggles is no guarantee of capability.
Yes well done to Gannet - we are running second to them as usual but the 'inflatables off Chiv' remark is a cheap and pathetic shot
Forgot to mention - with 66 mil pers remaining in SAR all on pensionable service and plenty with kids at boarding school that will still be picked up by the taxpayer and the operators profit goes on top - no savings I'm afraid
My attendance had to be cancelled at the last minute due to shift plot faffs.Senior Trooper - it's not a question of moving on from a golden age, all things change - I accept that as part of life. But when you get to my age and have seen some of the 'changes' that have been implemented, for what seems like all good reasons at the time, but are often the result of 'empire building' and ambitious individuals rather than through a real need for change, one can be rather cynical about claims made to support such change.
Unfortunately the senior guys in the MCA know very little about helicopter SAR - strangely enough the main reason the MoD got involved with SARH - and that attitude of 'with us or against us' is not the way forward. The MCA care about things maritime and coastal, as they should, but have minimal experience of inland/mountain/urban SAR - SARH helicopters will be tasked to lots of stuff the big MCA don't understand so they need to bring that experience into play not alienate it.
Pasptoo - there is lots of NVG experience out there, some relevant, some not - some current, some not - but in order to operate safely and with no loss of capability, a robust, well structured and monitored training scheme will be required and there is not a huge time frame available to organise it. Time spent on goggles is no guarantee of capability.
Yes well done to Gannet - we are running second to them as usual but the 'inflatables off Chiv' remark is a cheap and pathetic shot
Forgot to mention - with 66 mil pers remaining in SAR all on pensionable service and plenty with kids at boarding school that will still be picked up by the taxpayer and the operators profit goes on top - no savings I'm afraid