UK Police helicopter budget cuts
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
tigerfish
Now, I'm sure I read earlier that this was going to happen whatever, even if the Home Secretary has to force it, so what would be the use in writing to MPs etc?
Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!
Maybe HnH is correct, "Stop worrying about something that isnt going to happen", because it seems to me that the ones worrying the most are the ones that want it to happen!
Why this magical red herring date of 2012?
Why do things virtually stay the same until then? Maybe because in reality 'they' know things work well enough as they are, and are living under the spell that after the Olympics the world will be a better place. What if we get the World Cup? Do the dates move?
To save all this faffing around, why don't we just operate a straight no borders policy (that operate fine in some areas already), and employ just one accountant to bill the appropriate force for the service that they have had from a different forces aircraft?
One day force A will support Force B and the next week Force B may have to support force C and then force C will support force A, I'm sure this sort of thing is well within the capabilities of a reasonable accountant type member of staff.
Blimey, I graduated as a rocket scientist (or was it Archbishop?), but needn't have bothered, simply employ a pilot accountant to do it and you can save on floater cover at the same time! And while they're at it, they can keep a record of Tracker recoveries and bill them as well!
I really am about to give up! UK Police Aviation is threatened with the greatest challenge to its very existance since the day it was formed, and most useful thing that you can offer is to argue about the relative merits of Tracker! No wonder that you have been back footed. How many PA Chairs have you written to? How many MP's have you lobbied? Don't bother to reply. I can guess!
Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!
Maybe HnH is correct, "Stop worrying about something that isnt going to happen", because it seems to me that the ones worrying the most are the ones that want it to happen!
Why this magical red herring date of 2012?
Why do things virtually stay the same until then? Maybe because in reality 'they' know things work well enough as they are, and are living under the spell that after the Olympics the world will be a better place. What if we get the World Cup? Do the dates move?
To save all this faffing around, why don't we just operate a straight no borders policy (that operate fine in some areas already), and employ just one accountant to bill the appropriate force for the service that they have had from a different forces aircraft?
One day force A will support Force B and the next week Force B may have to support force C and then force C will support force A, I'm sure this sort of thing is well within the capabilities of a reasonable accountant type member of staff.
Blimey, I graduated as a rocket scientist (or was it Archbishop?), but needn't have bothered, simply employ a pilot accountant to do it and you can save on floater cover at the same time! And while they're at it, they can keep a record of Tracker recoveries and bill them as well!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: upyours
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see it making a significant dent in the UK Police market.
.... the AW folks reckon it be the perfect platform to fit tommorrow's UK police needs.
Well said Tigerfish and thank you Senior Pilot for putting some boot in there and stamping on that diversion.
My earlier suggestion about getting in touch with the people that matter was met with being wholly ignored except for the sad comment about the stamp.
This is [some of] your lives at risk here. If you like what you are doing get writing to those who are ignorant of the situation, PA members, MP's, federation etc because if you do not provide them with the material that may make them pay attention they will follow where NPIA/ACPO lead them. The Police Federation are sitting on the fence leaning towards the bosses side - I know, I asked them - and only you Observers, the serving PF members, have half a chance to turn that around.
UK police air support is - or should be - in a very strong position with its very high profile position in the world of police aviation. Many out there across the waters see the UK operations as being the ones to emulate.
Increasingly a few of us have begun to wonder whether that 'hero worship' is in any way deserved.
From some of the content of this thread it seems not. Do something.
My earlier suggestion about getting in touch with the people that matter was met with being wholly ignored except for the sad comment about the stamp.
This is [some of] your lives at risk here. If you like what you are doing get writing to those who are ignorant of the situation, PA members, MP's, federation etc because if you do not provide them with the material that may make them pay attention they will follow where NPIA/ACPO lead them. The Police Federation are sitting on the fence leaning towards the bosses side - I know, I asked them - and only you Observers, the serving PF members, have half a chance to turn that around.
UK police air support is - or should be - in a very strong position with its very high profile position in the world of police aviation. Many out there across the waters see the UK operations as being the ones to emulate.
Increasingly a few of us have begun to wonder whether that 'hero worship' is in any way deserved.
From some of the content of this thread it seems not. Do something.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Quote:
Fly_For_Fun
Now, where did I put that bucket of sand?
Perhaps we are in the thought phase of, well we've been told it's going to happen, lets just wait and see how long it takes someone to realise it won't work and the units can't do what we want them to, when we want them to do it? In the meantime, lets talk about trying to increase revenue by charging commercial companies. Yes they do a lot of 'other work', but it's not free though is it !!!
Now, where did I put that bucket of sand?
Back in your post #668
Fly_For_Fun
.....and what of the cost to put this all back in place in a few years with a new government and hierarchy in place..... MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL!
I reckon that by not doing anything, you don't force people to dig their heels in defending this, and we may get back to where we were quicker.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Petitioning ???
Here's a thought :
Does anyone with some amount of clout know how those Home Office / Government Petition things work ?
The ones where interested parties can demonstrate their support on a particular topic such as :
"I DISAGREE WITH THE POLICY TO ENFORCE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF POLICE AIRCRAFT ACROSS THE UK WITHOUT FULL AND PROPER CONSULTATION TO DEMONSTRATE THE EFFECT UPON LOCAL COMMUNITY POLICING, AND AN INDEPENDENT ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF ALL THE COSTS INVOLVED TO FORM A NATIONAL POLICE AIR SUPPORT UNIT, AND WOULD RECOMMEND THAT CURRENT AIR SUPPORT UNITS CONTINUE WORKING TOWARDS BETTER REGIONAL AND CROSS BORDER COLLABORATION AS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE TO SUCH A POLICY.
..... probably not the best wording but you get the idea - perhaps someone far more knowledgable than me could propose something better ?
Such a petition would be open not only to those employed / serving on Air Support Units, but to the thousands of serving Police Officers and staff that the aircraft are there to support ?
The way I think it works is that people can electronically sign such petitions in support of the topic,
but can't acually vote against it, unless of course a separate petition were started in support of NPAS.
Does anyone with some amount of clout know how those Home Office / Government Petition things work ?
The ones where interested parties can demonstrate their support on a particular topic such as :
"I DISAGREE WITH THE POLICY TO ENFORCE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF POLICE AIRCRAFT ACROSS THE UK WITHOUT FULL AND PROPER CONSULTATION TO DEMONSTRATE THE EFFECT UPON LOCAL COMMUNITY POLICING, AND AN INDEPENDENT ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF ALL THE COSTS INVOLVED TO FORM A NATIONAL POLICE AIR SUPPORT UNIT, AND WOULD RECOMMEND THAT CURRENT AIR SUPPORT UNITS CONTINUE WORKING TOWARDS BETTER REGIONAL AND CROSS BORDER COLLABORATION AS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE TO SUCH A POLICY.
..... probably not the best wording but you get the idea - perhaps someone far more knowledgable than me could propose something better ?
Such a petition would be open not only to those employed / serving on Air Support Units, but to the thousands of serving Police Officers and staff that the aircraft are there to support ?
The way I think it works is that people can electronically sign such petitions in support of the topic,
but can't acually vote against it, unless of course a separate petition were started in support of NPAS.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: upyours
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How on earth does resignation of what is occurring constitute a positive reaction. If one says and does nothing, the ill informed, [or not so clever(or "I've got job and am clever so jack attitude rules")] will blunder on into the valley of [expletive], and we are all doomed. That is until the vehicle pursuits go through the roof, people are killed and injured because police cars will be forced to be more aggressive because the helicopter that allows them to back off is no longer available, and all the man hours need for a missing person search go through the roof, where the helicopter did it in a fraction of the time and cost effective too.
Look back 10 years and you will find the reasons air support was invented....and so it will be again, but at what cost?
Look back 10 years and you will find the reasons air support was invented....and so it will be again, but at what cost?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North East
Age: 68
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cleveland making cuts.
Cleveland Police Authority chairman wants to replace 70 PC's in a privatisation move. New ten year contract with a private firm to save money. Will air support survive?
More Cleveland Police jobs set to move - Local News - News - Gazette Live
The writing is on the wall but the same Cleveland Police Authority councillors claimed £200,000 in expenses for the last year alone!
Not bad for sitting around a table drinking tea now and again
More Cleveland Police jobs set to move - Local News - News - Gazette Live
The writing is on the wall but the same Cleveland Police Authority councillors claimed £200,000 in expenses for the last year alone!
Not bad for sitting around a table drinking tea now and again
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Police Air Support activities costs the taxpayer £66,000,000 per year.
No proper, independent, expert, neutral analysis of the cost effectiveness of that expenditure has ever been carried out, probably simply because no-one wants to know the answer which, it is 98% certain, would say that the same money spent in another way (more officers?) would result in more crime reduction and convictions.
Exactly how many of the airborne pursuits result in a conviction at all, let alone one for something more serious than vehicle and road traffic crime?
One a day? I wonder. More, or fewer?
1,100 more officers, though.....
No proper, independent, expert, neutral analysis of the cost effectiveness of that expenditure has ever been carried out, probably simply because no-one wants to know the answer which, it is 98% certain, would say that the same money spent in another way (more officers?) would result in more crime reduction and convictions.
Exactly how many of the airborne pursuits result in a conviction at all, let alone one for something more serious than vehicle and road traffic crime?
One a day? I wonder. More, or fewer?
1,100 more officers, though.....
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet another fantastic example of someone that hasn't got a clue about what they are talking about - spouting meaningless figures. 
That will be a huge pay rise then :
£66,000,000 a year ( not that this figure is necessarily accurate ) divided by 1100 more Officers = £60,000 salary a year each.
I know a lot of PC Observers that would gladly welcome giving up their jobs for an increase to that kind of salary
A salary of £40k is more realistic which would give 1650 more PC's across the UK,
if Air support were scrapped altogether and all of the £66 mil quoted could be utilised.
That's 38 extra PC's per Police force across the UK, covering a 24 hr period which would mean a maximum of around 6 or 7 on duty across the whole force area - to carry all of the work previosuly conducted by the now extinct Air support Unit, and some of which cannot be conducted on the ground
That will be a huge pay rise then :
£66,000,000 a year ( not that this figure is necessarily accurate ) divided by 1100 more Officers = £60,000 salary a year each.
I know a lot of PC Observers that would gladly welcome giving up their jobs for an increase to that kind of salary
A salary of £40k is more realistic which would give 1650 more PC's across the UK,
if Air support were scrapped altogether and all of the £66 mil quoted could be utilised.
That's 38 extra PC's per Police force across the UK, covering a 24 hr period which would mean a maximum of around 6 or 7 on duty across the whole force area - to carry all of the work previosuly conducted by the now extinct Air support Unit, and some of which cannot be conducted on the ground
Last edited by Coconutty; 14th Nov 2010 at 17:20. Reason: To add extra info.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Middle bit
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coconutty, thank you for putting 10 Downing street straight...
10 Downing street, you are obviously a home office employee, which makes you well qualified to talk through your A£$se.Your comments are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.If you wish to load such remarks or take part in this debate you may be better advised to plough through the previous forty odd pages and reach some viable arguement.
And like most politicians sidekicks....your numbers dont add up
Hnh
10 Downing street, you are obviously a home office employee, which makes you well qualified to talk through your A£$se.Your comments are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.If you wish to load such remarks or take part in this debate you may be better advised to plough through the previous forty odd pages and reach some viable arguement.
And like most politicians sidekicks....your numbers dont add up
Hnh
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: upyours
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point is not what it costs but what it saves. 1 road death due to out of control vehicle thief = £1,000,000, Man hours saved during missing person searches incalculable. Simples. Even for you 10downingst.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Back to the part of the thread that mentioned alternate means!
Well here's a saving or 2!
Blimping useless! Weather defeats the £80,000 police surveillance balloon
When it was launched a little over a year ago it was seen as another important weapon in the battle against crime.
Costing £80,000, the unmanned surveillance balloon was designed to give police an ‘eye in the sky’ at major events.
But police chiefs have been forced to scrap the balloon – because it can’t cope with British weather.
When faced with the high winds and heavy rain for which Manchester is notorious, the 25ft helium-filled balloon had a nasty habit of being blown away or ripping.
It is understood to have been used only 18 times before being scrapped by Greater Manchester Police, which means it cost more than £4,000 per operation.
A police source said: ‘It was absolutely rubbish to be truthful and never worked properly from the day we got it.
‘It was meant to give us an “eye in the sky” at major events where crowd control is an issue. ‘The whole idea was it would save us money because we would not have to use the force helicopter. ‘But it has cost us a lot of money because although the idea was good in theory, in practice it was a disaster. We knew it as the useless blimp.’
Another senior officer said: ‘It was never fit for purpose. On days when we had good weather, it worked absolutely fine.‘But on a day with even a moderate breeze or a downpour, the balloon would be a nightmare, veering here and there until it ripped or got blown away. It was a bit of a joke really.
The blimp had a camera mounted underneath that could swivel 360 degrees and film up to a mile away. Although Mancunians say their city’s reputation for bad weather is undeserved, police found that whenever conditions were windy the balloon was not stable enough for filming to be carried out.
It was hoped the balloon would help the policing of events such as demonstrations, football matches and open-air concerts, and would also be used for covert surveillance. Officers were given training in how to operate the balloon and the cameras.
The force’s top brass are remaining tight-lipped about what events it was used for – but admit it has been a massive letdown.
It has now been sold at a loss but police chiefs said they were unable to confirm the figure.
Chief Superintendent Dave Anthony, of Greater Manchester Police’s specialist operations branch, said: ‘We experienced a number of technical and other problems with the blimp and it was decided, especially in the current climate, that it was neither cost effective nor operationally viable to maintain.
‘We have been able to recycle various parts of the blimp that have been put to operational use while the vehicle itself has been sold.’
Police surveillance blimp scrapped because it can't cope with bad weather | Mail Online
There are a few classic lines in the comments section of the article
Blimping useless! Weather defeats the £80,000 police surveillance balloon
When it was launched a little over a year ago it was seen as another important weapon in the battle against crime.
Costing £80,000, the unmanned surveillance balloon was designed to give police an ‘eye in the sky’ at major events.
But police chiefs have been forced to scrap the balloon – because it can’t cope with British weather.
When faced with the high winds and heavy rain for which Manchester is notorious, the 25ft helium-filled balloon had a nasty habit of being blown away or ripping.
It is understood to have been used only 18 times before being scrapped by Greater Manchester Police, which means it cost more than £4,000 per operation.
A police source said: ‘It was absolutely rubbish to be truthful and never worked properly from the day we got it.
‘It was meant to give us an “eye in the sky” at major events where crowd control is an issue. ‘The whole idea was it would save us money because we would not have to use the force helicopter. ‘But it has cost us a lot of money because although the idea was good in theory, in practice it was a disaster. We knew it as the useless blimp.’
Another senior officer said: ‘It was never fit for purpose. On days when we had good weather, it worked absolutely fine.‘But on a day with even a moderate breeze or a downpour, the balloon would be a nightmare, veering here and there until it ripped or got blown away. It was a bit of a joke really.
The blimp had a camera mounted underneath that could swivel 360 degrees and film up to a mile away. Although Mancunians say their city’s reputation for bad weather is undeserved, police found that whenever conditions were windy the balloon was not stable enough for filming to be carried out.
It was hoped the balloon would help the policing of events such as demonstrations, football matches and open-air concerts, and would also be used for covert surveillance. Officers were given training in how to operate the balloon and the cameras.
The force’s top brass are remaining tight-lipped about what events it was used for – but admit it has been a massive letdown.
It has now been sold at a loss but police chiefs said they were unable to confirm the figure.
Chief Superintendent Dave Anthony, of Greater Manchester Police’s specialist operations branch, said: ‘We experienced a number of technical and other problems with the blimp and it was decided, especially in the current climate, that it was neither cost effective nor operationally viable to maintain.
‘We have been able to recycle various parts of the blimp that have been put to operational use while the vehicle itself has been sold.’
Police surveillance blimp scrapped because it can't cope with bad weather | Mail Online
There are a few classic lines in the comments section of the article
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reference Post 692
I'm not quite sure what the national issues are that TCTC raises in his Post 692 or who it was in London that ignored his authoritative advice but a quick Google search led me to the following: "The Civil Aviation Authority (Metropolitan Police Service) Directions 2010" which came into force on 29th March 2010.
A quick glance of said Directions would suggest that London has indeed pulled the wool over the eyes of the Home Office, Department of Transport and the CAA -which is no mean feat by a bunch of numpties.
Or am I missing the point that TC is trying to make?
HN
A quick glance of said Directions would suggest that London has indeed pulled the wool over the eyes of the Home Office, Department of Transport and the CAA -which is no mean feat by a bunch of numpties.
Or am I missing the point that TC is trying to make?
HN
Last edited by hangnail; 14th Nov 2010 at 22:46. Reason: Grammar
SS
I am still working on this blimp item, if ever there was an advert for a consistent [national] aquisitions policy this seems to be it.
It seems that this is an internal whistle blower job and the 'rag' involved is the Manchester Evening News, lots of twists and turns on this including the purchase price.
The original official GMP quote on price was £800,000 which is consistent with a discount on the manufacturers list price of $1,3M ....you get an HGV to keep it in, that includes a mini control room, the gas bag, gas and sensor pod along with a legth of string..... but then someone at GMP bottled and the quote zoomed down to £80,000.... that is some fairy tale of a discount on the list price for all that gear!
Last I heard was that the MEN was running a story Saturday that brought into doubt another financial quote on the amount GMP raised from selling the bits..... a nice rounded number of £20,000 has been mentioned in some press reports ..... a goodly 25% of the purchase price except that MEN said they have seen the number as £13,000 [less fees?], so we may be down to about 2% of that 'real' price. Still not seen the Saturday MEN article though so not confirmed.
I am still working on this blimp item, if ever there was an advert for a consistent [national] aquisitions policy this seems to be it.
It seems that this is an internal whistle blower job and the 'rag' involved is the Manchester Evening News, lots of twists and turns on this including the purchase price.
The original official GMP quote on price was £800,000 which is consistent with a discount on the manufacturers list price of $1,3M ....you get an HGV to keep it in, that includes a mini control room, the gas bag, gas and sensor pod along with a legth of string..... but then someone at GMP bottled and the quote zoomed down to £80,000.... that is some fairy tale of a discount on the list price for all that gear!
Last I heard was that the MEN was running a story Saturday that brought into doubt another financial quote on the amount GMP raised from selling the bits..... a nice rounded number of £20,000 has been mentioned in some press reports ..... a goodly 25% of the purchase price except that MEN said they have seen the number as £13,000 [less fees?], so we may be down to about 2% of that 'real' price. Still not seen the Saturday MEN article though so not confirmed.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coconutty
The figure comes from ACPO. I divided it by £60K on the basis that the total cost of an additional officer is probably in the order of £60K. Since you seem unfamiliar with this kind of calculation, that would include overtime, NIC, Pension and other benefits, and the costs of additional support that the officer's presence and work will generate. I suspect that for an officer earning a basic salary of £40K my figure is on the low side, possibly very much so.
huntnhound
No, I'm afraid not, just a taxpayer, not a tax consumer.
I'm sorry, there's no polite way of saying....... "Bollox". That's the kind of number plucked from thin air on the basis of "if you are going to tell a fib, make it a good one."
However, I'll retire from this fray; I had hoped to introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.
66,000,000 a year ( not that this figure is necessarily accurate ) divided by 1100 more Officers = £60,000 salary a year each.
huntnhound
10 Downing street, you are obviously a home office employee,
1 road death due to out of control vehicle thief = £1,000,000,
However, I'll retire from this fray; I had hoped to introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In a world of my own!
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Truth
Downing Street, Well said. Hopefully your attempt to
Has not gone unoticed, the POLKA communities website (run by the NPIA)has just had a copy of the first of many NPAS breifing documents uploaded onto it.
It's a secure website and can only be accessed from a .pnn equipped computer. The NPAS team are monitoring it and will answer any questions posed on there apparently.
I don't think that I can put the address on here but I'm sure most of you will be able to find it. If you have any problems, PM me and I'll give you all the details.
WF
introduce some balance into the discussion, but I can see that it's not a welcome notion.
It's a secure website and can only be accessed from a .pnn equipped computer. The NPAS team are monitoring it and will answer any questions posed on there apparently.
I don't think that I can put the address on here but I'm sure most of you will be able to find it. If you have any problems, PM me and I'll give you all the details.
WF
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK Police Officers costs to the employer
Hi Guys,
You only have to look at ACPO's guidelines for charging for mutual aid. The document is unclassified and fully disclosable (dated 23 February 2009) and gives mid-point figures for long term costs of employment of an officer (as well as short term assignments).
The figure for the long term employment for a mid-point Constable including employer's pension contribution is £40,033. For completeness the figure for an inspector is £52,830 and that for a Superintendent is £92,651.
I must restate that these are the employer's costs and not what the officers actually receive each month - though we could have an interesting chat on the pension issue!
You only have to look at ACPO's guidelines for charging for mutual aid. The document is unclassified and fully disclosable (dated 23 February 2009) and gives mid-point figures for long term costs of employment of an officer (as well as short term assignments).
The figure for the long term employment for a mid-point Constable including employer's pension contribution is £40,033. For completeness the figure for an inspector is £52,830 and that for a Superintendent is £92,651.
I must restate that these are the employer's costs and not what the officers actually receive each month - though we could have an interesting chat on the pension issue!
I'm sorry, there's no polite way of saying....... "Bollox". That's the kind of number plucked from thin air on the basis of "if you are going to tell a fib, make it a good one."
The "ACPO" cost for Air Support, (2010/11) is 63.5M which they hope and pray will fall to 42M under the National project. (Source: NPIA briefing document dated 12.11.10).
Last edited by Fortyodd2; 16th Nov 2010 at 11:09.