Falklands Oil .......
Torque of the devil and Crab - reference the sub-50% serviceability of the Sea Kings in the FI, as far as I know, one of the cabs has been unserviceable for over 6 months now, and the other has not had 100% serviceability through that period. There have been many occasions when the BIH S61 has had to provide a minimal stand-by back-up service (not by any means SAR, but at least cover to transport a casualty from a safe landing site to medical care), due to no serviceable yellow cabs.
By my reckoning that is definitely sub-50% serviceability.
And Inputshaft's post #95 certainly describes the status and purpose of CHC's cover far more accurately than Crab's description.
By my reckoning that is definitely sub-50% serviceability.
And Inputshaft's post #95 certainly describes the status and purpose of CHC's cover far more accurately than Crab's description.
Last edited by farsouth; 13th Nov 2011 at 02:22. Reason: To correct Post# after thread merge
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Age: 61
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab,
I've no desire to push this much further, so I'll start by agreeing with you. We have minimal equipment and we do minimal training, by your standards. However, we produce an acceptable result within the requirements of the contract at an acceptable cost.. Why don't you get it that last bit? You are so blinded by the big SAR word that you forget that the CHC Falklands contract is a passenger carrying contract for a short term exploration rig. The hoisting requirement (there, I've stopped using the word SAR) is a small add-on to provide the required reliability to the crew change service if the RAF cannot provide the SAR cover required on the day.
Perhaps as a break in the discusson you would like to explain to me why you have had the nerve to be so pathetic that you didn't drive your kids to school in a Ferrari. I think that would have been faster than what you drove, and other people drive Ferraris, so come on, why didn't you? What's wrong with you that you didn't?
That's what you sound like on this matter.
I've no desire to push this much further, so I'll start by agreeing with you. We have minimal equipment and we do minimal training, by your standards. However, we produce an acceptable result within the requirements of the contract at an acceptable cost.. Why don't you get it that last bit? You are so blinded by the big SAR word that you forget that the CHC Falklands contract is a passenger carrying contract for a short term exploration rig. The hoisting requirement (there, I've stopped using the word SAR) is a small add-on to provide the required reliability to the crew change service if the RAF cannot provide the SAR cover required on the day.
Perhaps as a break in the discusson you would like to explain to me why you have had the nerve to be so pathetic that you didn't drive your kids to school in a Ferrari. I think that would have been faster than what you drove, and other people drive Ferraris, so come on, why didn't you? What's wrong with you that you didn't?
That's what you sound like on this matter.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Understanding what you can afford
Way back in this thread I recall pointing out that when all is said and done we will be lucky if we can afford ANY search and rescue capability.
Of course we have treaty obligations but these can often be satisfied by assets that are present even if their parlous training and equipment leaves them classified as 'second-rate'. That's what I have seen in other parts of the globe.
In a way it could be said that a sub 50% serviceability rate falls into that category.
When the money is not there to pay for a top class, even world-class service then you just have to do the best you can with what you have available. We seem to be heading in that direction. It's no fun having to accept second best but we are heading down that road and, unlike many other nations, we know what a top class operation looks and feels like so we can aspire to regain that status sometime in the future. There are plenty of other nations that would be happy just to have the right sort of assets let alone know what a 'proper' SAR outfit is all about. Then there are those with heaps of shiny helicopters with all the bells and whistles but couldn't winch a lone survivor in a calm sea.
I am confident that whatever happens our UK crews will do their best and we can all hope and pray that their best will be good enough.
G.
Of course we have treaty obligations but these can often be satisfied by assets that are present even if their parlous training and equipment leaves them classified as 'second-rate'. That's what I have seen in other parts of the globe.
In a way it could be said that a sub 50% serviceability rate falls into that category.
When the money is not there to pay for a top class, even world-class service then you just have to do the best you can with what you have available. We seem to be heading in that direction. It's no fun having to accept second best but we are heading down that road and, unlike many other nations, we know what a top class operation looks and feels like so we can aspire to regain that status sometime in the future. There are plenty of other nations that would be happy just to have the right sort of assets let alone know what a 'proper' SAR outfit is all about. Then there are those with heaps of shiny helicopters with all the bells and whistles but couldn't winch a lone survivor in a calm sea.
I am confident that whatever happens our UK crews will do their best and we can all hope and pray that their best will be good enough.
G.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Age: 61
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GinC
I'm going to jump in one last time. I'm worried that your balanced post unfortunately achieves what Crab has been attempting to do all along in this thread. Do not allow CHC's short term arrangement to support the temporary oil exploration in the Falklands - an arrangement that is only there in all its limited state, because the MOD have given the impression they cannot provide reliable maritime SAR cover -to bolster Crab's interminable need to belittle full time civil SAR in comparision to his military version.
The only reason I have got involved at all in this thread is not to justify in any way what we are doing here (frankly, what a bored 22 Sqn pilot in Devon thinks has no implication at all on our arrangement.). I am just hugely irritated that either because he simply doesn't have the experience to understand, or because he chooses deliberately to misrepresent facts, Crab is using an almost completely irrelevant example to further his "civvie companies can't do SAR" agenda.
Anyhow, I have obviously been dragged down to the level he likes to operate on, so I'm going to sign off on this particular subject.
I'm going to jump in one last time. I'm worried that your balanced post unfortunately achieves what Crab has been attempting to do all along in this thread. Do not allow CHC's short term arrangement to support the temporary oil exploration in the Falklands - an arrangement that is only there in all its limited state, because the MOD have given the impression they cannot provide reliable maritime SAR cover -to bolster Crab's interminable need to belittle full time civil SAR in comparision to his military version.
The only reason I have got involved at all in this thread is not to justify in any way what we are doing here (frankly, what a bored 22 Sqn pilot in Devon thinks has no implication at all on our arrangement.). I am just hugely irritated that either because he simply doesn't have the experience to understand, or because he chooses deliberately to misrepresent facts, Crab is using an almost completely irrelevant example to further his "civvie companies can't do SAR" agenda.
Anyhow, I have obviously been dragged down to the level he likes to operate on, so I'm going to sign off on this particular subject.
Last edited by inputshaft; 12th Nov 2011 at 22:21.
Would you like to detail the SAR experience of the other CHC pilots there?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inputshaft
I'm sorry you feel that I have in some way supported the notion that civvy-SAR was not up to the task. That was not my intention.
Throughout my career I have continued to come across remarkable accounts of how people were rescued by helicopter in dire circumstances. Sometimes even without a hoist.
The truth is that helicopter pilots are on the whole resourceful and adaptable professionals and when asked to help we will step up to the plate. Many SAR professionals have died on duty and we hail their commitment and hold their memory dear. Many of those that perished had the very best equipment and the very best training so we can observe that these factors do not insulate the profession completely. Similarly the lack of 'deluxe' equipment and training will not prevent those who asked to help doing their job as best they can.
We started HEMS in the UK with a beaten-up old Bo 105 with a few mods, one pilot, two paramedics and no doctor. Now look at the state of UK HEMS. One unit even has booked the new AW169 which hasn't even been built yet.
We are NOT, I suggest in the business of turning down a task just because we can't have all the latest toys and we are not allowed to play with them every day. If the guys down South have what they believe they need and have enough SAR experience elsewhere I would suggest they are up to the job.
G.
Throughout my career I have continued to come across remarkable accounts of how people were rescued by helicopter in dire circumstances. Sometimes even without a hoist.
The truth is that helicopter pilots are on the whole resourceful and adaptable professionals and when asked to help we will step up to the plate. Many SAR professionals have died on duty and we hail their commitment and hold their memory dear. Many of those that perished had the very best equipment and the very best training so we can observe that these factors do not insulate the profession completely. Similarly the lack of 'deluxe' equipment and training will not prevent those who asked to help doing their job as best they can.
We started HEMS in the UK with a beaten-up old Bo 105 with a few mods, one pilot, two paramedics and no doctor. Now look at the state of UK HEMS. One unit even has booked the new AW169 which hasn't even been built yet.
We are NOT, I suggest in the business of turning down a task just because we can't have all the latest toys and we are not allowed to play with them every day. If the guys down South have what they believe they need and have enough SAR experience elsewhere I would suggest they are up to the job.
G.
By my reckoning that is definitely sub-50% serviceability
Your facts may or may not be accurate, but the original term which I took issue with was 'dispatch reliability'. I assume (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that this term means "how many times does a Sea King manage to launch on a task". Seeing as one doesn't (usually, in the FI) need both aircraft at once for a SAROp, having only one aircraft serviceable out of two needn't drop the 'dispatch reliability' below 100%.
I can well believe that the excellent British International outfit have helped out on the inevitable occasions when neither Sea King has been available (let's face it, no individual aircraft of any type can offer 24/365 availability!), but if there have been, say, 30 SAROps in the last 12 months and the Sea King has only been able to launch on 27 of these, that's still a 90% dispatch reliability.
Anyway, let's hope that the oil workers never need the services of a rescue helicopter of any variety, and one hopes we'll hear the future of UK and FI SAR before too long...
TOTD
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF SAR
Inputshaft,
You have to remember that Crab knows nothing other than the RAF (this is not a slight on Crab, just the truth). He has been brought up to believe that there is only one correct way of doing things and this will be paid for by the taxpayer no matter what the cost. However, in the world outside, money talks. A gold plated SAR service is unnecessary in most situations where a more cost effective 'tailored fit' will do. However, crews and equipment still have to up to the task and I agree that some questions must be asked about Jigsaw recurrency training and experience.
As an example of ex RAF officer's naivety after his appointment in a management position in a well known civilian company, he was surprised to discover that there were specific civilian SAR FTLs!
You have to remember that Crab knows nothing other than the RAF (this is not a slight on Crab, just the truth). He has been brought up to believe that there is only one correct way of doing things and this will be paid for by the taxpayer no matter what the cost. However, in the world outside, money talks. A gold plated SAR service is unnecessary in most situations where a more cost effective 'tailored fit' will do. However, crews and equipment still have to up to the task and I agree that some questions must be asked about Jigsaw recurrency training and experience.
As an example of ex RAF officer's naivety after his appointment in a management position in a well known civilian company, he was surprised to discover that there were specific civilian SAR FTLs!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TofTD
anyone can manouvre stats to back up what their argument. From what I can glean there seem to fortunately be few call outs in the FI so it is possible for there to be no SAR cover for 50% of the time but if the aircraft happens to be servicable when a call comes in then that would equate to a 100% despatch rate would it not?
anyone can manouvre stats to back up what their argument. From what I can glean there seem to fortunately be few call outs in the FI so it is possible for there to be no SAR cover for 50% of the time but if the aircraft happens to be servicable when a call comes in then that would equate to a 100% despatch rate would it not?
Trex,
Absolutely right. Please remember though that the concept of 'dispatch reliability' was not mine! I agree that it is a dubious stat, which can be manipulated either way, and my first post simply objected to the use of questionable information to launch slurs on RAF SAR provision (as well as the idea that CHC had had to step in to provide a superior rescue capability).
TOTD
Absolutely right. Please remember though that the concept of 'dispatch reliability' was not mine! I agree that it is a dubious stat, which can be manipulated either way, and my first post simply objected to the use of questionable information to launch slurs on RAF SAR provision (as well as the idea that CHC had had to step in to provide a superior rescue capability).
TOTD
itk
Was this an ironic post?
This was a rescue in calm conditions right next to a manned rig and all that JIGSAW managed to do was recover everyone to a place of safety within TWO HOURS thank goodness it wasn't winter with a normal N Sea wind of 25 kts and 2-3m seas. I presume by JIGSAW assests you mean the ARCs (rescue craft from mother ship).
As for JIGSAW having no planned muti seat dinghy training - unbelieveable as all N sea helicopters carry 2 multi seat liferafts so what were they expecting to rescue pax from!!
I also believe that Lossiemouth actually played a hand in this rescue!
HF
A minor point: in contrast to your assertion that "they couldn't get the job done" JIGSAW assets did recover everyone to a place a safety within 2 hours - the "advertised capability".
This was a rescue in calm conditions right next to a manned rig and all that JIGSAW managed to do was recover everyone to a place of safety within TWO HOURS thank goodness it wasn't winter with a normal N Sea wind of 25 kts and 2-3m seas. I presume by JIGSAW assests you mean the ARCs (rescue craft from mother ship).
As for JIGSAW having no planned muti seat dinghy training - unbelieveable as all N sea helicopters carry 2 multi seat liferafts so what were they expecting to rescue pax from!!
I also believe that Lossiemouth actually played a hand in this rescue!
HF
Leiv Eriksson exploration rig to spud first well in Falklands tomorrow
Falklands confirms second oil rig has reached the Islands; spudding planned for Monday
Leiv Ericksson exploration rig has now arrived in Falklands waters
Falklands oil find successful
“Yes, she’s here and getting ready for Monday. She’s a real nice state of the art baby” said the Falklands sources.
Early in the day the Buenos Aires press quoting sources at Argentina’s Defence and Foreign Affairs ministries said that the oil rig flagged in Bahamas and contracted by Borders & Southern Plc and Falkland Oil and Gas Ltd (FOGL) had been detected approaching Malvinas waters.
According to the Buenos Aires media the rig was spotted by a maritime routine flight from an Orion P3-B belonging to the Argentina Air Naval service which took pictures of the vessel while sailing 547 miles east of Comodoro Rivadavia.
So far two other oil companies have been involved in the current round of exploratory drilling in Falklands’ waters which started in 2010: Desire Petroleum and Rockhopper Exploration Plc. Between them they have drilled over twenty wells with the ‘Ocean Guardian’ exploratory rig which left for Scotland in mid January.
Early in the day the Buenos Aires press quoting sources at Argentina’s Defence and Foreign Affairs ministries said that the oil rig flagged in Bahamas and contracted by Borders & Southern Plc and Falkland Oil and Gas Ltd (FOGL) had been detected approaching Malvinas waters.
According to the Buenos Aires media the rig was spotted by a maritime routine flight from an Orion P3-B belonging to the Argentina Air Naval service which took pictures of the vessel while sailing 547 miles east of Comodoro Rivadavia.
So far two other oil companies have been involved in the current round of exploratory drilling in Falklands’ waters which started in 2010: Desire Petroleum and Rockhopper Exploration Plc. Between them they have drilled over twenty wells with the ‘Ocean Guardian’ exploratory rig which left for Scotland in mid January.
The deep water exploration oil rig Leiv Eriksson sailed into Falkland waters last week to drill for undersea energy reserves.
The discovery of economically viable offshore oil and gas off the islands is fuelling the frenzy over the islands in Argentina.
The discovery of economically viable offshore oil and gas off the islands is fuelling the frenzy over the islands in Argentina.
Leiv Ericksson exploration rig has now arrived in Falklands waters
Falklands oil find successful
