SARH to go
Or as in one of my crew rooms....The Retired Army pilot who got recalled to active duty....while his four serving Territorial Army (Army National Guard ) mates stayed at home guarding the Homefront.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truro
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab, 'tis only a few mild japes at your expense
The primary requisite for any service is a sense of humour. No, FED, you are correct, I know nada about Afghanistan or Iraq, apart from what I'm told by returning service personnel. I'm the lucky one. The fighting troops are experiencing more in a week than I, and my contempories experienced in years. That is of course another discussion.
My contention is that Crab does himself no favours by extolling his own virtues while denigrating those who were service personnel, but now work for a civilian contractor or those who have never taken the shilling. There's that grubby pair of words, 'civilian contractor.' If we can forget that the crews wear slightly different kit and receive their take home pay via differing routes, then perhaps Crab could accept that all the crews do a magnificent job, in conditions where most of us during our flying careers would rather remain chained to a coffee machine. There is no situation where one deserves more praise or kudos than the other, even if there's a disparity about that ancient nugget NVG.
It has been stated previously that the yacht crew or mountain walker don't care if you wear green, blue or even grey, they are happy to see your winch op descending to them. I contend that the civilian structure stands on an equal foot with their service team members.
The primary requisite for any service is a sense of humour. No, FED, you are correct, I know nada about Afghanistan or Iraq, apart from what I'm told by returning service personnel. I'm the lucky one. The fighting troops are experiencing more in a week than I, and my contempories experienced in years. That is of course another discussion.
My contention is that Crab does himself no favours by extolling his own virtues while denigrating those who were service personnel, but now work for a civilian contractor or those who have never taken the shilling. There's that grubby pair of words, 'civilian contractor.' If we can forget that the crews wear slightly different kit and receive their take home pay via differing routes, then perhaps Crab could accept that all the crews do a magnificent job, in conditions where most of us during our flying careers would rather remain chained to a coffee machine. There is no situation where one deserves more praise or kudos than the other, even if there's a disparity about that ancient nugget NVG.
It has been stated previously that the yacht crew or mountain walker don't care if you wear green, blue or even grey, they are happy to see your winch op descending to them. I contend that the civilian structure stands on an equal foot with their service team members.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truro
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed Bertie.
A divide should not exist, yet it appears to be there. All parties are paid by the Govt, be they civilian or military. There is nothing inherently wrong in providing a service if none would exist without that service provider.
Would there be a military SAR unit on Sumburgh or Stornoway if BHL had not taken the opportunity to man the contract? I don't think so. Surely the question that must be answered is, "Do the civilian contractors adhere to and fulfil their contract?" I believe they do, and many people have cause to thank them for doing so.
Second question. "Could the services supply and crew the same stations"? I think not, purely due to overstretch and equipment limitations i.e. lack of aircraft.
A divide should not exist, yet it appears to be there. All parties are paid by the Govt, be they civilian or military. There is nothing inherently wrong in providing a service if none would exist without that service provider.
Would there be a military SAR unit on Sumburgh or Stornoway if BHL had not taken the opportunity to man the contract? I don't think so. Surely the question that must be answered is, "Do the civilian contractors adhere to and fulfil their contract?" I believe they do, and many people have cause to thank them for doing so.
Second question. "Could the services supply and crew the same stations"? I think not, purely due to overstretch and equipment limitations i.e. lack of aircraft.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SARH
Well done bootneck
At last an outbreak of telling it as it is, the survivor does not give a cats whiskers if you blue, green, pink, yellow, red and white etc
all they care about is staying alive!
Having been on both sides of this argument for 25 years, all i have is the upmost respect for any crew that do this job
regards
spam
At last an outbreak of telling it as it is, the survivor does not give a cats whiskers if you blue, green, pink, yellow, red and white etc
all they care about is staying alive!
Having been on both sides of this argument for 25 years, all i have is the upmost respect for any crew that do this job
regards
spam
Having a jape at your expense.
This thread as degenerated in to a mocking, slanging match over a little thing that the RAF may require to borrow SAR pilots to meet its commitments in the Near East. Most of the bile has been directed at one person and the standard of the comments are infantile.
I don’t know Crabb but he has taken an unreasonable amount of stick over something that he has no control over. He is a member of a group of services that are responsible for the defence of the United Kingdom and the teeth behind the British Government’s foreign policy. As such he will, and will expect to be, sent to any part of the world where his services are required, AND HE WILL DO SO WITHOUT HESITATION.
Even if he has to go to Mongolia.
I did it when I was in the services. Now, as a civilian pilot, I can tell them to get knotted.
Take another hypothetical scenario.
CHC have been awarded a sudden contract in the Sudan for four S92s. The contractual requirement is that the captains must have a minimum of 500 hours on type. To meet this requirement CHC is going to have to pull twelve captains off their SAR contract and replace them with newly recruited direct entry captains. You would hear the wailing all around the coast of the UK.
I wonder what their reaction would be if they received the same stick as they give Crabb.
This thread as degenerated in to a mocking, slanging match over a little thing that the RAF may require to borrow SAR pilots to meet its commitments in the Near East. Most of the bile has been directed at one person and the standard of the comments are infantile.
I don’t know Crabb but he has taken an unreasonable amount of stick over something that he has no control over. He is a member of a group of services that are responsible for the defence of the United Kingdom and the teeth behind the British Government’s foreign policy. As such he will, and will expect to be, sent to any part of the world where his services are required, AND HE WILL DO SO WITHOUT HESITATION.
Crab arrives at Camp Bastion and is directed to his Yurt.
I did it when I was in the services. Now, as a civilian pilot, I can tell them to get knotted.
Take another hypothetical scenario.
CHC have been awarded a sudden contract in the Sudan for four S92s. The contractual requirement is that the captains must have a minimum of 500 hours on type. To meet this requirement CHC is going to have to pull twelve captains off their SAR contract and replace them with newly recruited direct entry captains. You would hear the wailing all around the coast of the UK.
I wonder what their reaction would be if they received the same stick as they give Crabb.
Bootneck - I don't believe a divide does exist - those that have taken my comments on the future of SAR as a criticism of the professional competence of civilian crews are often not in SAR themselves or have wrongly interpreted my viewpoint.
Your comment about fulfilling the contract is exactly my concern over SARH - if the contract is poorly written or monitored then the contractors lawyers can have a field day saving money but fulfilling the contract. I had to endure this at Middle Wallop with appalling Lynx serviceability and Bristows management arguing the toss over what was and what wasn't a serviceable aircraft, failing to deliver what the Army were expecting but incredibly meeting (theoretically) the terms of the contract. Everyone suffered, including the Bristows engineers, except the management who hid behind contractual definitions as an excuse for not delivering.
This sort of thing is made worse when there are 2 or more contractors and sub-contractors - they can each blame the others for failing to meet KPIs while the customer gets screwed.
Tallsar explained quite clearly why the MCA got the bases it did but if they were not there and the need for them was established, then of course the military could provide - we would just spread ourselves even more thinly on the ground without recourse to EU employment law, CAA maximum flying hours or the H&SE to defend ourselves with.
If you don't think the RAF has the best all-round SAR capability (max range, NVG, FLIR turret and almost 360 radar) then you don't know SAR at all. It is that capability that must not be degraded in any future contract but has still to be matched by civilian service providers (and the RN in terms of FLIR).
If the promises of future capability by contractors were always reliable we would have a fantastic Nimrod MR4, Mk 3 Chinooks, a Bowman radio that worked and an S92 that could do 300nm RoA.
Whilst the casualty won't care who comes to rescue him, he might care if he doesn't get rescued because the required capability was 'taken at risk' or subject to contractual negotiations or planned to be implemented at a future date.
Is that clear enough?
Your comment about fulfilling the contract is exactly my concern over SARH - if the contract is poorly written or monitored then the contractors lawyers can have a field day saving money but fulfilling the contract. I had to endure this at Middle Wallop with appalling Lynx serviceability and Bristows management arguing the toss over what was and what wasn't a serviceable aircraft, failing to deliver what the Army were expecting but incredibly meeting (theoretically) the terms of the contract. Everyone suffered, including the Bristows engineers, except the management who hid behind contractual definitions as an excuse for not delivering.
This sort of thing is made worse when there are 2 or more contractors and sub-contractors - they can each blame the others for failing to meet KPIs while the customer gets screwed.
Tallsar explained quite clearly why the MCA got the bases it did but if they were not there and the need for them was established, then of course the military could provide - we would just spread ourselves even more thinly on the ground without recourse to EU employment law, CAA maximum flying hours or the H&SE to defend ourselves with.
If you don't think the RAF has the best all-round SAR capability (max range, NVG, FLIR turret and almost 360 radar) then you don't know SAR at all. It is that capability that must not be degraded in any future contract but has still to be matched by civilian service providers (and the RN in terms of FLIR).
If the promises of future capability by contractors were always reliable we would have a fantastic Nimrod MR4, Mk 3 Chinooks, a Bowman radio that worked and an S92 that could do 300nm RoA.
Whilst the casualty won't care who comes to rescue him, he might care if he doesn't get rescued because the required capability was 'taken at risk' or subject to contractual negotiations or planned to be implemented at a future date.
Is that clear enough?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Over the rainbow
Age: 51
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CHC have been awarded a sudden contract in the Sudan for four S92s. The contractual requirement is that the captains must have a minimum of 500 hours on type. To meet this requirement CHC is going to have to pull twelve captains off their SAR contract and replace them with newly recruited direct entry captains. You would hear the wailing all around the coast of the UK.
If this happened and its a big if, then CHC have more S92 drivers then just the SAR pilots.
And yes i know its just a senario! But unlike the military we can say NO!
Because we are civvies who didn't sign up for queen and country.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 67
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote Crab:
This sort of thing is made worse when there are 2 or more contractors and sub-contractors - they can each blame the others for failing to meet KPIs while the customer gets screwed.
I woud suggest that the problem isn't the customer getting screwed. It's the classic situation when the military, and I suspect government departments generally, enter contracts: that the customer and the end-user are two separate groups. The customer can be perfectly happy - he goes home at 5pm with a clear desk. The end-user knows that he is being shafted and the country ripped off. Given that the end-user has no means of telling the bloke with the cheque book not to sign, and commits a military offence by whistleblowing, this sort of thing is almost a gift to contractors. Some are entirely honourable; a significant minority are not.
And in SAR the real end-user just sinks out of sight beneath the waves.
This sort of thing is made worse when there are 2 or more contractors and sub-contractors - they can each blame the others for failing to meet KPIs while the customer gets screwed.
I woud suggest that the problem isn't the customer getting screwed. It's the classic situation when the military, and I suspect government departments generally, enter contracts: that the customer and the end-user are two separate groups. The customer can be perfectly happy - he goes home at 5pm with a clear desk. The end-user knows that he is being shafted and the country ripped off. Given that the end-user has no means of telling the bloke with the cheque book not to sign, and commits a military offence by whistleblowing, this sort of thing is almost a gift to contractors. Some are entirely honourable; a significant minority are not.
And in SAR the real end-user just sinks out of sight beneath the waves.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truro
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FED, most of my 'bile' was directed at the underdog with my tongue firmly wedged in my cheek. I'm delighted that the good old system of fair play and support for the above mentioned member still exists. My memories of fearless chaps, devoted to the cause, willing to hurl themselves at anything that is sent their way extends way back, but somehow didn't include Cranwell's finest, having greater faith in a junglie getting me where I expected to be dropped off, rather than 'Hoskins' depositing me and mine across a border.
The last sentence in your paragraph had me chuckling again. Be honest. If you were warmly and firmly ensconced at Chivenor, wouldn't you perhaps raise just one eyebrow if the drafting nerd forwarded an offer of a posting to Afghanistan. In theory no. In practice I reckon a few teddy bears would meet Mr Steiff's repair team.
A quick response to Crab.
The military was always covered by civilian law including these days employment law, the CAA will allow pilots to fly and work longer days than I ever had to in service with the exception of NI, and H&S can work to your advantage, safety, no accidents either with aircraft or ground operations.
I don’t know Crabb but he has taken an unreasonable amount of stick over something that he has no control over. He is a member of a group of services that are responsible for the defence of the United Kingdom and the teeth behind the British Government’s foreign policy. As such he will, and will expect to be, sent to any part of the world where his services are required, AND HE WILL DO SO WITHOUT HESITATION.
Crab, are you going to accept 267.4's very kind offer? Post number 246.
your inside lane seems to be ahead of the rest of us on the SARH situation,maybe you would like to enlighten the readership on your source of information.
On the S92 SAR variant you have no idea of the aircrafts capability and more to the point seem to want to remain ignorant despte fellow SAR crews invitation to enlighten you by a welcome visit to an operational base.
We up north will even fund your visit,the glove is down.
Followed by.
267.4 I am not at liberty to reveal my sources, I sometimes receive information from various people that I cannot repeat and only allude to on this forum but trust me when I say that I don't make it up. Send me the tickets and I'll be there
Flights to Glasgow and Edinburgh depart from Exeter.
The last sentence in your paragraph had me chuckling again. Be honest. If you were warmly and firmly ensconced at Chivenor, wouldn't you perhaps raise just one eyebrow if the drafting nerd forwarded an offer of a posting to Afghanistan. In theory no. In practice I reckon a few teddy bears would meet Mr Steiff's repair team.
A quick response to Crab.
The military was always covered by civilian law including these days employment law, the CAA will allow pilots to fly and work longer days than I ever had to in service with the exception of NI, and H&S can work to your advantage, safety, no accidents either with aircraft or ground operations.
we would just spread ourselves even more thinly on the ground without recourse to EU employment law, CAA maximum flying hours or the H&SE to defend ourselves with.
I don’t know Crabb but he has taken an unreasonable amount of stick over something that he has no control over. He is a member of a group of services that are responsible for the defence of the United Kingdom and the teeth behind the British Government’s foreign policy. As such he will, and will expect to be, sent to any part of the world where his services are required, AND HE WILL DO SO WITHOUT HESITATION.
Crab, are you going to accept 267.4's very kind offer? Post number 246.
your inside lane seems to be ahead of the rest of us on the SARH situation,maybe you would like to enlighten the readership on your source of information.
On the S92 SAR variant you have no idea of the aircrafts capability and more to the point seem to want to remain ignorant despte fellow SAR crews invitation to enlighten you by a welcome visit to an operational base.
We up north will even fund your visit,the glove is down.
Followed by.
267.4 I am not at liberty to reveal my sources, I sometimes receive information from various people that I cannot repeat and only allude to on this forum but trust me when I say that I don't make it up. Send me the tickets and I'll be there
Flights to Glasgow and Edinburgh depart from Exeter.
Last edited by Bootneck; 10th Aug 2008 at 17:09.
rather than 'Hoskins' depositing me and mine across a border.
From time immemorial all three services have been guilty of dropping off, bombing or shelling the wrong place and no doubt they will continue to do so.
It's unfortunate but the tone of your last post suggests that even after twenty-five years or more out of the service you are still carrying a chip on your shoulder about the crabs.
I thought that we had all grown out of that.
As a final appendum, because I am backing out of this now because I have better things to do, it is obvious that I have been in the wrong job. There is no way that I as an offshore pilot I could find the time to compose the great tomes on this thread.
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 11th Aug 2008 at 05:35.
Now you are sounding desperate Bootneck - you have resorted to Lost's infantile 'cut and paste with comments'.
As you show, I replied the very next post that I would go when they sent me the tickets (shift plot, SAROps and Falklands plot permitting). I will have to take leave to do this (which I am happy to do) so it is not without some sacrifice on my part.
Your chip about crabs is so large I am surprised you can get in a cockpit with it on your shoulder
As you show, I replied the very next post that I would go when they sent me the tickets (shift plot, SAROps and Falklands plot permitting). I will have to take leave to do this (which I am happy to do) so it is not without some sacrifice on my part.
Your chip about crabs is so large I am surprised you can get in a cockpit with it on your shoulder
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truro
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you have resorted to Lost's infantile 'cut and paste with comments'
Anyway, take a day off, travel north and meet the guys on the islands. Their hospitality and zeal should allay any fears you may harbour about their abilities. Then let us know what you think about civilian SAR.
As for disliking Crab, nah, it's wonderful with a hint of garlic and lemon.
Keep on going Bootneck, you are making yourself look almost as clever as you did on the 'something we can all agree on' thread
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: england
Age: 64
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to put the record straight, the Stornoway S92 did land at Glasgow airport following a fire alarm activation on one of the engines, however, it did not land until it had completed its task on ONE ENGINE, this task being out of area once again covering for the lack of MOD SAR Helicopter coverage, they all break down folks
On the training side, I have heard that those colleagues at Valley have fallen behind drastically with their ongoing training due to the lack of available aircraft,surely this cannot be good for either UKSAR or indeed the individuals concerned.
To put those people in the know (in this case not in the know) it was not just a lowly Sqn Ldr who provided expert advice and guidance from the MOD to the MCA for the interim contract, there were four "experts" from the RAF, from differing disciplines giving advice.
The 66 military that will be left in SAR-H post 2012 was predicated by senior RAF/RN personnel, your own kind have sold you out, not faceless civil servants or those employed in Civ SAR. Why were you sold down the river, not because of your skills/work ethics or personal hygiene, purely and simply because the majority of your workload is assisting civilians and the fact that your skills are needed on the front line.
Can I also just point out that the majority of the moaning from the military side comes from the RAF, the RN are obviously quite content in the main with the way things are progressing. I would suggest that the RN probably has more to moan about as those in SAR-H will now have to have detachments away in the FI where they did not before.
The last I heard, it costs between 250 and 300 million a year for the MOD to provide the service they currently provide, multiply by 25 or 30 and strangely enough the cost is smack bang in the middle of the projected cost (as stated in the OJEU) for SAR-H, funny thing that
so I'm thinking no change for the taxpayer then, same or better service (time will tell) for no extra cost, bargain!!!!!
Look forward to meeting you Crab when you come begging for work post 2012, unless of course you enjoy the weather too much in the sunnier places of the world you are likely to visit as a front liner.
I see the main reason for all the bitching is because some (not all) who have done 6 or 7 tours in SAR concurrently with the SARF will now have to actually do what they are paid to do, as I did, and have to fight for queen and country.......
On the training side, I have heard that those colleagues at Valley have fallen behind drastically with their ongoing training due to the lack of available aircraft,surely this cannot be good for either UKSAR or indeed the individuals concerned.
To put those people in the know (in this case not in the know) it was not just a lowly Sqn Ldr who provided expert advice and guidance from the MOD to the MCA for the interim contract, there were four "experts" from the RAF, from differing disciplines giving advice.
The 66 military that will be left in SAR-H post 2012 was predicated by senior RAF/RN personnel, your own kind have sold you out, not faceless civil servants or those employed in Civ SAR. Why were you sold down the river, not because of your skills/work ethics or personal hygiene, purely and simply because the majority of your workload is assisting civilians and the fact that your skills are needed on the front line.
Can I also just point out that the majority of the moaning from the military side comes from the RAF, the RN are obviously quite content in the main with the way things are progressing. I would suggest that the RN probably has more to moan about as those in SAR-H will now have to have detachments away in the FI where they did not before.
The last I heard, it costs between 250 and 300 million a year for the MOD to provide the service they currently provide, multiply by 25 or 30 and strangely enough the cost is smack bang in the middle of the projected cost (as stated in the OJEU) for SAR-H, funny thing that
so I'm thinking no change for the taxpayer then, same or better service (time will tell) for no extra cost, bargain!!!!!Look forward to meeting you Crab when you come begging for work post 2012, unless of course you enjoy the weather too much in the sunnier places of the world you are likely to visit as a front liner.
I see the main reason for all the bitching is because some (not all) who have done 6 or 7 tours in SAR concurrently with the SARF will now have to actually do what they are paid to do, as I did, and have to fight for queen and country.......
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All Over
Age: 61
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now you are sounding desperate Bootneck - you have resorted to Lost's infantile 'cut and paste with comments'.
The only reason you dislike me cutting and pasting your remarks is because it shows that you can't hold an argument together for more than a few months without contridicting yourself in your sad and vindictive attempts to destroy civy SAR. I also note that when Faffner Shim cut and pasted my quotes with comments you didn't find that infantile but maybe that was because he's one of your boys and was insulting me so that's all very acceptable to you the contradiction king of Rotorheads!!!
And let's face it nobody really believes your arguments are because you want to improve SAR for the future because because only about a month ago you were suggesting putting new blades on old sea kings!!!
Your arguments are all about you keeping your cosy little position in your cosy little SAR unit in your cosy little world and nothing to do with anything other than that! I don't mind that but at least have the balls to admit it.
Keep on spinning... it must be time for the RAF to have another celebration you've had 90 years old, the spitfire, what's next the catering department number of cakes baked? How come the Senior Service and the Army just get on with the job without all the fanfare? I bet you don't answer that one!
keeping your cosy little position in your cosy little SAR unit in your cosy little world
Not that I am knocking them. I did a similar sort of thing myself.
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 17th Aug 2008 at 06:37.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it not true that in general the military provide what they happen to have available where as the civvies provide what the contract tells them to provide....? In ten years time there'll be some chap aptly named FAB@SAAAVN who will be telling us why the Merlin is the only way to go in terms of SAR and why the S98 is a load of ****e!!! I would not like to see the military back in SAR in Ireland but only because I want to keep my job and not coz they wouldnt do an excellent job. They did so in the past.
The service we provide in Ireland is the one requested by the Dept as deemed required by the Dept and its band of advisors. We'll give them what they want provided they're willing to pay for it. The constraints put on us by the authorities.. IAA, EASA PHECC etc are done so in the public interest and so our response is measured correctly. IMHO our manuals are very sensibly written and in reality forgiveness is far easier to get than permission.
As far as servicability goes, rates are extremely high but we'll not rest on our laurels.... That servicability record is down to many factors including a great aircraft and excellent engineers....and those servicability rates are transparent.
Crab you're drawing continuous fire not because of the merits or otherwise of the RAF service but because of the arrogant tone of your posts. I would love to do a year stint at an RAF or RN or USCG base...I'm sure I would learn tons and be a more rounded pilot as a result. There have been lots of ex service personell who have come thru the civvie SAR bases in Ireland...some were (and still are) excellent pilots and crew.But the best ones were always the ones who came with the right attitude, confident of their abilities and an open mind that they might learn something new!!!
Safe flying to all and if I need picking up you can fly whatever colour or type of aircraft your taxpayer has provided...!!!
The service we provide in Ireland is the one requested by the Dept as deemed required by the Dept and its band of advisors. We'll give them what they want provided they're willing to pay for it. The constraints put on us by the authorities.. IAA, EASA PHECC etc are done so in the public interest and so our response is measured correctly. IMHO our manuals are very sensibly written and in reality forgiveness is far easier to get than permission.
As far as servicability goes, rates are extremely high but we'll not rest on our laurels.... That servicability record is down to many factors including a great aircraft and excellent engineers....and those servicability rates are transparent.
Crab you're drawing continuous fire not because of the merits or otherwise of the RAF service but because of the arrogant tone of your posts. I would love to do a year stint at an RAF or RN or USCG base...I'm sure I would learn tons and be a more rounded pilot as a result. There have been lots of ex service personell who have come thru the civvie SAR bases in Ireland...some were (and still are) excellent pilots and crew.But the best ones were always the ones who came with the right attitude, confident of their abilities and an open mind that they might learn something new!!!
Safe flying to all and if I need picking up you can fly whatever colour or type of aircraft your taxpayer has provided...!!!
Last edited by Decks; 17th Aug 2008 at 08:59.