SAR - Recovering large numbers of survivors.
ArrandCee - no it would have been useless at both Boscastle and Gloucester - the Boscastle buildings wer all pitched roof so nowhere flat to land the basket and the Gloucester jobs were mianly one or two persons at a time from precarios positions (one being swept away by the river) where the only option was a winchman deployed straight to the casualty.
Sasless - the RAF don't use divers/rescue swimmers because we don't think putting another person free in the water (even if he is a God-like swimmer) is a sensible way to do things. We keep the winchman attached to the wire so he can be extricated quickly if required. In the same vein, we don't leave winchmen in the mountains cling precariously to small ledges, they only come off the wire if it is safe to do so. On decks, we prefer to deliver the winchman to the deck rather than have him swim to it and then climb up the side (lots of fun in a big sea state).
We have what we think is the best option for the variety of rescues we are called upon to perform and I don't think we have been found wanting yet - it is not that we are stuck in our ways but change for change sake is pointless.
I think the RN went the diver route because of the likelihood of needing to rescue a pilot from a ditched and possibly submerged aircraft (carrier ops) and their use of divers is more to do with Military roles than the need on a civilian rescue.
Um Lifting - good posts - put flesh on the bones of some of my thoughts.
TRC - I'm sorry you don't like the criticism - it is just my opinion that you can only make a realistic case for your basket in a very limited set of circumstances. There are lots of specialised bits of kit that would be nice to have on occasions but we start to move towards Thunderbird 2 with mission pods territory. Our role equipment is always being refined and improved but there needs to be a clear need and a demonstrated increase in effectiveness before new stuff pushes out the older (and well proven) gear.
Sasless - the RAF don't use divers/rescue swimmers because we don't think putting another person free in the water (even if he is a God-like swimmer) is a sensible way to do things. We keep the winchman attached to the wire so he can be extricated quickly if required. In the same vein, we don't leave winchmen in the mountains cling precariously to small ledges, they only come off the wire if it is safe to do so. On decks, we prefer to deliver the winchman to the deck rather than have him swim to it and then climb up the side (lots of fun in a big sea state).
We have what we think is the best option for the variety of rescues we are called upon to perform and I don't think we have been found wanting yet - it is not that we are stuck in our ways but change for change sake is pointless.
I think the RN went the diver route because of the likelihood of needing to rescue a pilot from a ditched and possibly submerged aircraft (carrier ops) and their use of divers is more to do with Military roles than the need on a civilian rescue.
Um Lifting - good posts - put flesh on the bones of some of my thoughts.
TRC - I'm sorry you don't like the criticism - it is just my opinion that you can only make a realistic case for your basket in a very limited set of circumstances. There are lots of specialised bits of kit that would be nice to have on occasions but we start to move towards Thunderbird 2 with mission pods territory. Our role equipment is always being refined and improved but there needs to be a clear need and a demonstrated increase in effectiveness before new stuff pushes out the older (and well proven) gear.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further thoughts.........
Well I read all that and still think that a two-hoist two-door solution is a good way of speeding up the hoist rate in very particular scenario. Not for all of course but when you carry out a risk analysis of the scenarios around UK the large ship evac (too far for the basket and nowhere to cross-deck) scenario is one that scores high on the probability scale and high on the 'consequences' scale too. I think this idea has some legs. Only to be used in a low hover (less than 25 ft??) and needs to be a quick-fit option.
The basket too has a place in your armoury although I think you would need to 'long-line' it and is probably the only way you could effectively deal with a high-rise mass evac,
Remember the old saying:-
For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
I'm a bit of a petrolhead and have a few tools in my tool-box that I have hardly ever used but when I did use them they were the ONLY tool for the job and I would have been snookered without them.
I would rather see a basket sit in the corner of a helideck or in the back of the hangar and never used than not have one when I needed it.
G
The basket too has a place in your armoury although I think you would need to 'long-line' it and is probably the only way you could effectively deal with a high-rise mass evac,
Remember the old saying:-
For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
I'm a bit of a petrolhead and have a few tools in my tool-box that I have hardly ever used but when I did use them they were the ONLY tool for the job and I would have been snookered without them.
I would rather see a basket sit in the corner of a helideck or in the back of the hangar and never used than not have one when I needed it.
G
Geoffers -
Not if it meant money could be better spent improving kit that does get used. I keep being told that SAR post 2012 will be lean and efficient - buying baskets that won't get used seems at odds with that.
Mass evacuation of several thousand people (that is what the big cruise liners carry) is just not possible using helicopters, no matter how many winches you put on them.
As others have said - the only sensible location for a basket is on the vessel/rig itself so the owners/operators of the vessel will have to pay for them and then work out how to get the SAR providers to authorise their use when they are not owned or serviced by them.
TRC -
A criticism by its very nature is a negative comment on the worth or value of something - constructive criticism is one of those modern management type phrases which tries to dress up telling the truth (that something is sh*te and needs to be rethought) by pretending you are offering advice as to how to improve it.
Would you have preferred - 'what a nice basket - now if you could just make it a little less baskety and find another way of carrying it, it will be exactly what we need?'
I would rather see a basket sit in the corner of a helideck or in the back of the hangar and never used than not have one when I needed it.
Mass evacuation of several thousand people (that is what the big cruise liners carry) is just not possible using helicopters, no matter how many winches you put on them.
As others have said - the only sensible location for a basket is on the vessel/rig itself so the owners/operators of the vessel will have to pay for them and then work out how to get the SAR providers to authorise their use when they are not owned or serviced by them.
TRC -
I don't have a problem with constructive critcism at all. I welcome it.
Would you have preferred - 'what a nice basket - now if you could just make it a little less baskety and find another way of carrying it, it will be exactly what we need?'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
never say never
The world of aviation is dotted with examples of the 'forget it, it will never work' response to innovation:-
"Now what have you done Igor? What a heap of scrap that is. It may fly but you will never make it a useful military tool"
"Give the Navy aircraft! You must be joking. You'll never be able to fly off a ship with a decent payload".
"Correct Prime Minister, you don't need aircraft carriers anymore, the Air Marshal chappie told me he can bomb the hell out of anywhere from Port Stanley to Timbuctoo so they will be able to provide the Fleet with all the air cover they need".
"Well Mr Whittle, it certainly makes a lot of noise but I'm afraid we can't afford to fund silly ideas that have no future".
"A silicon what? Don't be silly, pass me that Abacus".
"You say it's called a 'wheel', well, it's a bit too round for my liking. Maybe we can turn it into a table".
G
"Now what have you done Igor? What a heap of scrap that is. It may fly but you will never make it a useful military tool"
"Give the Navy aircraft! You must be joking. You'll never be able to fly off a ship with a decent payload".
"Correct Prime Minister, you don't need aircraft carriers anymore, the Air Marshal chappie told me he can bomb the hell out of anywhere from Port Stanley to Timbuctoo so they will be able to provide the Fleet with all the air cover they need".
"Well Mr Whittle, it certainly makes a lot of noise but I'm afraid we can't afford to fund silly ideas that have no future".
"A silicon what? Don't be silly, pass me that Abacus".
"You say it's called a 'wheel', well, it's a bit too round for my liking. Maybe we can turn it into a table".
G
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the SAR conferences the United States Coast Guard statistics show 90% of all rescues are within 12 miles of shore. In North America SAR crews recovering large numbers are more likely to respond to the aftermath of floods, hurricanes, earthquakes or a terrorist event.
The interesting significant factor with the large baskets is regardless of influences they do not spin. When floating the folding end gates allow people to swim in. These aspects help the SAR crews not hinder them. Operationally the SAR Squadron may not want to fly an empty at 120 knots but the US military determined the envelope safe for all Department of Defense helicopters. 100kts at GW and 120kts EW is a reasonable and useful flight envelope especially considering human carriage is most probably hovering people out of harms way.
There are numerous video clips showing various litters on hoists spinning out of control. This is stressful for all parties but not a reason not to use hoists. The US Air Force Air National Guard determined in their Katrina after action report that when hoisting from large isolated groups families were separated. The assessment went on to say that had they used baskets the operation would have been more productive with less probability of separating those families.
Baskets can be deployed with equipment for longer distances. A jet ski, appropriate inflatable rafts, gear to ward off hypothermia and other considerations could be part of a SAR operational kit.
Given the US 90% scenarios two trained SAR crews the one with a basket is going be more productive during the “Golden Hour” or immediately after the event.
I believe you have to look at a particular region’s most likely large scale recovery event and use the best multiplier.
The interesting significant factor with the large baskets is regardless of influences they do not spin. When floating the folding end gates allow people to swim in. These aspects help the SAR crews not hinder them. Operationally the SAR Squadron may not want to fly an empty at 120 knots but the US military determined the envelope safe for all Department of Defense helicopters. 100kts at GW and 120kts EW is a reasonable and useful flight envelope especially considering human carriage is most probably hovering people out of harms way.
There are numerous video clips showing various litters on hoists spinning out of control. This is stressful for all parties but not a reason not to use hoists. The US Air Force Air National Guard determined in their Katrina after action report that when hoisting from large isolated groups families were separated. The assessment went on to say that had they used baskets the operation would have been more productive with less probability of separating those families.
Baskets can be deployed with equipment for longer distances. A jet ski, appropriate inflatable rafts, gear to ward off hypothermia and other considerations could be part of a SAR operational kit.
Given the US 90% scenarios two trained SAR crews the one with a basket is going be more productive during the “Golden Hour” or immediately after the event.
I believe you have to look at a particular region’s most likely large scale recovery event and use the best multiplier.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jbt930
I take it all back........... the world has NOT been over-run by the brain-dead. There are real people out there capable of thinking outside the box instead of sitting inside their nice fur-lined light blue coloured comfy chair. Good on ya JBT. 
You know I'm only joshing Crab so don't go all crinkly on me.
G
You know I'm only joshing Crab so don't go all crinkly on me.
G
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinking from a passenger point of view, if I was on a ship/oil rig which was on fire/sinking, I am not going to wait for Crab or anyone else to rock up with a helicopter or Thunderbird 2, winch or basket. Straight for the lifeboats/liferafts. There is no way that helicopters are the answer to quickly evacuating large passenger vessels/oil rigs unless they can land on and there are lots of them.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
Your interpretation of 'constructive criticism' speaks volumes about you. A random on-line dictionary definition is:
"If advice, criticism or actions are constructive, they are useful and intended to help or improve something"
That interpretation is in line with the generally accepted meaning of the phrase - in the real world anyway.
There is no way on earth that I would have preferred:
Let's leave it at that. But I wish you the best of luck for the day that you become a civilian (perish the thought).
A criticism by its very nature is a negative comment on the worth or value of something - constructive criticism is one of those modern management type phrases which tries to dress up telling the truth (that something is sh*te and needs to be rethought) by pretending you are offering advice as to how to improve it.
"If advice, criticism or actions are constructive, they are useful and intended to help or improve something"
That interpretation is in line with the generally accepted meaning of the phrase - in the real world anyway.
There is no way on earth that I would have preferred:
'what a nice basket - now if you could just make it a little less baskety and find another way of carrying it, it will be exactly what we need?'
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jbt930-
That's as may be, but another fact that needs to be kept in mind is that 90% of all SAR cases do not occur within 12nm of a SAR unit, regardless of how close to shore they may be. I would guess that 50nm is probably a closer figure to median transit distance from unit to scene, but again, that will be dependent upon environment and operating area. Even so, I think the Golden Hour argument has little merit in support of the basket. You still haven't gotten the rescuees to care of any sort. It also needs to be considered that with an external load hung on the aircraft, routings will need to be changed, which will slow you down more. You can't fly over populated areas with an external load on.
Ah, Katrina. Initial responders to Katrina were limited, the number of casualties essentially was not. Recovery went on for many days.
Coast Guard Air Station New Orleans has 3 or 4 HH-65 helicopters, I forget. There are a few other trained SAR crews in that area with other organizations, but not many. CGAS Houston is to the west, and has, I think, 4 HH-65s. Coast Guard Aviation Training Center Mobile is about a one-hour flight to the east and has its own bevy of aircraft that are usually used for training, both HH-65 and HH-60J. Mobile does not have a dedicated helicopter SAR mission.
Mobile is the home of the standardization branches for both of those aircraft, the Rescue Swimmer standardization branch, and the Polar Operations Division, all of which have crews. Additionally, in any given week, there are a dozen or so pilots coming through from all around the CG for simulator training, which allowed for a prodigious manning level as long as the machines held up.
Katrina was not, by any measure, an ordinary event. More hoisting was done during the Katrina aftermath than had been done in the 50 years previous by Coast Guard helicopters.
The Air Guard, Army Guard, Navy, Marines... TV station 206s, cops, everybody showed up and wanted a piece of the rescue work.
In the U.S., as part of a package for disaster relief to be flown someplace in an airlifter for a catastrophic event of this sort... I can see it, though from a practical standpoint I wouldn't let FEMA touch it except to transfer money to the Air Force to procure, maintain, store, and transport the equipment. I would venture to guess (although I do not know) that this is likely what the Air Guard is doing with it, with perhaps a couple scattered in natural-disaster prone areas.
As I've said before, the UK is different, and I don't pretend to be an expert on that environment.
As a day-to-day piece of SAR equipment, I stand by my assessment that ordinary SAR is too uncertain to hook the basket to the machine and go on a mission because of what you lose in other capabilities. I completely disagree with Geoffers with regard to the basket that you'll be able to find someplace to 'drop it off' enroute unless pickling it into the Channel and creating a hazard to navigation is considered that place. Any other choice you defeat your Golden Hour argument (never mind I think that argument's weak to begin with).
That's as may be, but another fact that needs to be kept in mind is that 90% of all SAR cases do not occur within 12nm of a SAR unit, regardless of how close to shore they may be. I would guess that 50nm is probably a closer figure to median transit distance from unit to scene, but again, that will be dependent upon environment and operating area. Even so, I think the Golden Hour argument has little merit in support of the basket. You still haven't gotten the rescuees to care of any sort. It also needs to be considered that with an external load hung on the aircraft, routings will need to be changed, which will slow you down more. You can't fly over populated areas with an external load on.
Ah, Katrina. Initial responders to Katrina were limited, the number of casualties essentially was not. Recovery went on for many days.
Coast Guard Air Station New Orleans has 3 or 4 HH-65 helicopters, I forget. There are a few other trained SAR crews in that area with other organizations, but not many. CGAS Houston is to the west, and has, I think, 4 HH-65s. Coast Guard Aviation Training Center Mobile is about a one-hour flight to the east and has its own bevy of aircraft that are usually used for training, both HH-65 and HH-60J. Mobile does not have a dedicated helicopter SAR mission.
Mobile is the home of the standardization branches for both of those aircraft, the Rescue Swimmer standardization branch, and the Polar Operations Division, all of which have crews. Additionally, in any given week, there are a dozen or so pilots coming through from all around the CG for simulator training, which allowed for a prodigious manning level as long as the machines held up.
Katrina was not, by any measure, an ordinary event. More hoisting was done during the Katrina aftermath than had been done in the 50 years previous by Coast Guard helicopters.
The Air Guard, Army Guard, Navy, Marines... TV station 206s, cops, everybody showed up and wanted a piece of the rescue work.
In the U.S., as part of a package for disaster relief to be flown someplace in an airlifter for a catastrophic event of this sort... I can see it, though from a practical standpoint I wouldn't let FEMA touch it except to transfer money to the Air Force to procure, maintain, store, and transport the equipment. I would venture to guess (although I do not know) that this is likely what the Air Guard is doing with it, with perhaps a couple scattered in natural-disaster prone areas.
As I've said before, the UK is different, and I don't pretend to be an expert on that environment.
As a day-to-day piece of SAR equipment, I stand by my assessment that ordinary SAR is too uncertain to hook the basket to the machine and go on a mission because of what you lose in other capabilities. I completely disagree with Geoffers with regard to the basket that you'll be able to find someplace to 'drop it off' enroute unless pickling it into the Channel and creating a hazard to navigation is considered that place. Any other choice you defeat your Golden Hour argument (never mind I think that argument's weak to begin with).
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um... lifting...
No-one, not even the most avid supporter of the 'heavy' basket would suggest that it should replace the conventional and proven method of winching people out of harm way.
All that is being suggested here is that the 'heavy' basket should be used to complement the SAR force - whether off-shore or on-shore - when the need arises. I accept that it is a short range option - in US ops it's probably better described as ultra-short range, 10 miles at most, which would be pushing it for wet, shocked, etc survivors.
The point of it is simply a mass mover of people from jeopardy to a place of safety, quickly. Someone on here might be able to tell us how long it took to evacuate a dozen or more people from a factory roof in Sheffield by winch. If there is a major catastrophe - shipwreck, flood, oilfield event, highrise fire - and lots of people need moving short distances quickly with limited air-assets, it is a viable solution. It's obviously a poor choice if there's a trawler in trouble 400nm off the Lizard. The right tool for the right job - thats all.
No-one, not even the most avid supporter of the 'heavy' basket would suggest that it should replace the conventional and proven method of winching people out of harm way.
All that is being suggested here is that the 'heavy' basket should be used to complement the SAR force - whether off-shore or on-shore - when the need arises. I accept that it is a short range option - in US ops it's probably better described as ultra-short range, 10 miles at most, which would be pushing it for wet, shocked, etc survivors.
The point of it is simply a mass mover of people from jeopardy to a place of safety, quickly. Someone on here might be able to tell us how long it took to evacuate a dozen or more people from a factory roof in Sheffield by winch. If there is a major catastrophe - shipwreck, flood, oilfield event, highrise fire - and lots of people need moving short distances quickly with limited air-assets, it is a viable solution. It's obviously a poor choice if there's a trawler in trouble 400nm off the Lizard. The right tool for the right job - thats all.
Last edited by TRC; 22nd Feb 2009 at 21:30. Reason: Removing a sentence that was mis-typed.
Sasless - the RAF don't use divers/rescue swimmers because we don't think putting another person free in the water (even if he is a God-like swimmer) is a sensible way to do things. ......... On decks, we prefer to deliver the winchman to the deck rather than have him swim to it and then climb up the side (lots of fun in a big sea state).
The first half of your comment flies in the face of operational experience of many different SAR units in the world. Yet another spanner in the tool kit that could be used as needed but if not carried cannot.
The second part of the comment shows your lack of understanding of how Rescue Swimmers are used. I reckon some of that is from not being involved in that kind of operation but mostly comes from your inability to look outside your own window at the world about you.
As an aside.....our Rescue Swimmers do not consider themselves "God Like" but I will bet you most of the folks they met in the water certainly do.
Has your service ever sent a crewman over to our side of the water on an exchange where the fellow did a Rescue Swimmer course as a method of assessing the technique and actually seeing what is done by the Swimmer?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an aside.....our Rescue Swimmers do not consider themselves "God Like" but I will bet you most of the folks they met in the water certainly do.
That said, the rest of your comment is quite correct. Free swimming is just one tool in the kit for the rescue swimmer, and not used all or even most of the time despite what indications films may have given. A large amount of swimmer training is done free swimming because that is the most demanding regime (for the swimmer) where the on-cable work has a higher workload demand for the hoist operator/pilot team.
The bulk of the personnel hoists I did on actual cases in my last few years of SAR were what were called 'direct delivery with a quick strop', which can be done to a boat, a cliff, a roof, or the water. Basket stays in the cabin.
If our dauntless, yet hapless SASless were bobbing about, the swimmer is lowered in a seat harness, SASless' feebly thrashing left arm (if he has one) is grabbed by the swimmer's right (or vice-versa) and the strop is transferred from the swimmer's shoulder to under the arms of our (now somewhat) fearless SASless and cinched up. Next thing he knows he's at the door in a safe and soggy embrace with the swimmer. Tension has never left the cable... never mind the sensual tension that SASless may or may not be starting to feel... not my concern, I'm checking fuel and sending the swimmer down again if need be.
crab, I do sense you have some misconceptions about what those colonial upstarts in the white and orange helicopters do, and more particularly, about what they don't do. Point of order, we've been at it since 1790... though not the helicopter part...
While I can take no credit for it as I've been away from the school for well over a decade now and had nothing to do with this part of it anyway, it is gratifying to see Air Force PJs, Navy CSAR specialists and Army Special Forces fellows coming to the little Coast Guard schoolhouse on the Oregon/Washington border. I believe some Canadian boys bring some Molson down every now and again as well because the Columbia River Bar area is just about an ideal natural environment for practicing demanding rescues and is enhanced by the presence of an Air Station on the Oregon side and the Coast Guard Motor Lifeboat School on the Washington side of the Columbia.
The story is told (and it is more or less true), that after the inaugural class in 1996 there was a big piece with photos in the local Astoria newspaper on what those crazy Coast Guard boys were doing out there in the mouth of the Columbia and in them caves and hangin' from them helicopters over the cliffs last week. Some retired Army busybody (who apparently knew what he was about) in the area read said piece and made a few phone calls and the next thing there were some Army fellows wanting to do a little training in what seemed to them to be a good thing.
The USCG being the self-effacing and frankly impoverished outfit it is, sort of hemmed and hawed and said, "Well, Sergeant-Major, it's kinda like this... we don't actually have the resources for additional students... we're scraping by as a proof-of-concept now..." "Aw, hell, whaddya need? Desks, jet fuel, trucks, pyro, helicopters, computers, 10,000 gallons of flat olive paint, shelter halves, what? What?" and lo, the DoD checkbooks were opened and there was much rejoicing and cultural cross-pollination, which I am to gather continues to this day.
How precisely the school went from being the: "Advanced Rescue Swimmer School" (I know why that was... budget constraints, and, after all it was a swimmer's grand vision) to "Advanced Aircrew School" in a span of a few short years isn't entirely clear to me, but I would not be surprised if the DoD folks were involved to some degree or other in that part of the evolution. However it came about, the SAR services provided to the public are decidedly enhanced by that evolution.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Near the beach
Age: 63
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rescuer Training
Whether your rescuers remain attached to a wire or not, surely the main criteria is that the individual is capable to undertake the task in conditions that his/her organisation deems safe to operate in?
But as this safe limit (cut-off-point) is often hard to define due numerous factors surely the key is to prepare rescuers with appropriate training for worst case scenarios. How does this training compare between organisations?
But as this safe limit (cut-off-point) is often hard to define due numerous factors surely the key is to prepare rescuers with appropriate training for worst case scenarios. How does this training compare between organisations?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It often comes down to knowing what you can't do, not what you can. The key to developing an appropriate training program is correctly assessing the needs of the operational environment first, then figuring out training objectives to meet those needs, then developing enabling objectives, procedures, and equipments to suit. Just because the RAF operates one way, the RN another, the USCG a third, and various other organizations in their own ways, doesn't necessarily mean any of them are incorrect.
Many of the organizations (I know the USCG does) send individuals to evaluate other programs and open their programs up for similar visits. You take what works in your environment and apply it. A heavy slathering of CRM and command trust & confidence are helpful as well.
That's how doctrine and manuals develop and evolve. There is no (and in my opinion shouldn't be) overarching goal to make all rescue organizations all over the place work in precisely the same manner. The optimum rescue procedures are a moving target and a compromise between specialization and generalization by necessity. Probably always will be.
Many of the organizations (I know the USCG does) send individuals to evaluate other programs and open their programs up for similar visits. You take what works in your environment and apply it. A heavy slathering of CRM and command trust & confidence are helpful as well.
That's how doctrine and manuals develop and evolve. There is no (and in my opinion shouldn't be) overarching goal to make all rescue organizations all over the place work in precisely the same manner. The optimum rescue procedures are a moving target and a compromise between specialization and generalization by necessity. Probably always will be.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um....lifting
"drop it off en route" - where did I say that? As far as I can see I never did.
It may not be appreciated by those that have never worked in a deep-water offshore oil environment that there are many production facilities (extant or planned) situated from 50 to 150 nautical miles from land and are NOT bolted to the sea bed. It is possible for these 'floaters' (semi-subs, tension legs, FPSOs - converted tankers) to be compromised and develop a list. More than 10-15 degrees of list and your helideck is useless for landing but still OK as a winching point. Fire and power failure can rob you of the resources needed to evacuate as per your emergency plan. I know they shouldn't but as I have said before the ship hasn't read the Emergency Plan so doesn't know that unmaintained and uncared for emergency equipment will fail if it's not kept up to scratch.
I am talking about things that have already happened, happening again, not dreaming up mission impossible.
It may not be appreciated by those that have never worked in a deep-water offshore oil environment that there are many production facilities (extant or planned) situated from 50 to 150 nautical miles from land and are NOT bolted to the sea bed. It is possible for these 'floaters' (semi-subs, tension legs, FPSOs - converted tankers) to be compromised and develop a list. More than 10-15 degrees of list and your helideck is useless for landing but still OK as a winching point. Fire and power failure can rob you of the resources needed to evacuate as per your emergency plan. I know they shouldn't but as I have said before the ship hasn't read the Emergency Plan so doesn't know that unmaintained and uncared for emergency equipment will fail if it's not kept up to scratch.
I am talking about things that have already happened, happening again, not dreaming up mission impossible.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It shouldn't be difficult to drop it somewhere for later retrieval.
Been working deepwater offshore oil/gas environment for a few years now, so indeed know how 'tis.
The Lord helps those who help themselves, I always say... makes it a sight easier to help them if they do that as well if He decides to stay clear.
Strangely enough I am quite aware of how the USCG use their rescue swimmers and Um-lifting's point highlights that for most rescues (90% I think he said)the swimmer is used as a winchman and deployed straight to the casualty - just like we do everytime.
How is that stuck in the past SASless?
The fact remains that there are very few ocassions when it is neccessary to deploy a swimmer/diver in a free drop. In a very, very small percentage of rescues such as casualties trapped under a boat, in a submerged car or in a flooded cave - a swimmer might make a difference but the concept of ops goes against the first rule of first aid, don't make yourself another casualty. Yes they are very fit, brave boys and they go places I never would but then so do our winchmen.
Um lifting - whilst we are on the subject of history, I think the UK military has been saving lives at sea for a lot longer than 219 years I also believe the whole concept of using aircraft and boats to rescue those in the water was borne from the Battle of Britain to recover downed pilots from the Channel (this was before the USA joined the party)
You are right about exchanges though - there has been a USCG exchange with the RAFSARF for many years, sadly the beancounters ended it last year - I think if you talked to those who have come to UK and experienced how we do things you might find that most of them went back to the USCG much richer for the experience and often surprised at our capability.
TRC - sorry your sense of humour has deserted you, most civilians can take a joke see that, it's a smilie. Unfortunately you have watered down your argument since you started on mass evacuation from ships a good way offshore and you have downshifted to 12nm from the coast.
Geoffers - has someone offered you a promotion or a pay rise if you get this twin hoist idea up and running?
How is that stuck in the past SASless?
The fact remains that there are very few ocassions when it is neccessary to deploy a swimmer/diver in a free drop. In a very, very small percentage of rescues such as casualties trapped under a boat, in a submerged car or in a flooded cave - a swimmer might make a difference but the concept of ops goes against the first rule of first aid, don't make yourself another casualty. Yes they are very fit, brave boys and they go places I never would but then so do our winchmen.
Um lifting - whilst we are on the subject of history, I think the UK military has been saving lives at sea for a lot longer than 219 years
I also believe the whole concept of using aircraft and boats to rescue those in the water was borne from the Battle of Britain to recover downed pilots from the Channel (this was before the USA joined the party)You are right about exchanges though - there has been a USCG exchange with the RAFSARF for many years, sadly the beancounters ended it last year - I think if you talked to those who have come to UK and experienced how we do things you might find that most of them went back to the USCG much richer for the experience and often surprised at our capability.
TRC - sorry your sense of humour has deserted you, most civilians can take a joke
see that, it's a smilie. Unfortunately you have watered down your argument since you started on mass evacuation from ships a good way offshore and you have downshifted to 12nm from the coast.Geoffers - has someone offered you a promotion or a pay rise if you get this twin hoist idea up and running?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: mobile
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recovery of survivors.
I may be a bit rusty but I was under the impression that the basket method used by the USCG was primarily to keep the survivor in a horizontal position when being lifted out of freezing water so preventing migration of blood from the chest area to the legs. We carried two strops on the hook to achieve this and it was a right fiddle.
The two winch arrangement is there to give a second lifting capability should the primary winch go u/s or the cable has to be cut. My m emory is a bit suspect but I did the case of the Alexander Kesserling (excuse spelling) in system Failure Analysis and seem to remember that two Sea Kings lost their winch cables during the rescue and had to return to base.
Bristow used to have a rescue net for the cargo hook in the hangar years ago and it looked pretty simple though I have never seen it in action.
The two winch arrangement is there to give a second lifting capability should the primary winch go u/s or the cable has to be cut. My m emory is a bit suspect but I did the case of the Alexander Kesserling (excuse spelling) in system Failure Analysis and seem to remember that two Sea Kings lost their winch cables during the rescue and had to return to base.
Bristow used to have a rescue net for the cargo hook in the hangar years ago and it looked pretty simple though I have never seen it in action.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Just south of the Keevil gap.
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re. baskets
Straying slightly from the two winch theme, and not wanting to start a trans-atlantic pi$$ing contest, but.....
Billy Pugh didn't develop his net until 1955, and that was for crane transfers, the "Sproule Net" had already been trialled at RNAS Ford during 1954. Already previously discussed on Rotorheads, and a nice pic of a Dragonfly with the device appears on John Eacotts website.
Taking cover, awaiting incoming.
Billy Pugh didn't develop his net until 1955, and that was for crane transfers, the "Sproule Net" had already been trialled at RNAS Ford during 1954. Already previously discussed on Rotorheads, and a nice pic of a Dragonfly with the device appears on John Eacotts website.
Taking cover, awaiting incoming.