Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Old 15th Feb 2012, 18:40
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good starting point Jim! Many usual suspects in that list as expected... Whether some have moved ahead with an application is of course open to debate, as is whether others that may not have attended the Industry Day and yet could still have submitted. Attendance at the Industry Day is not an essential precursor for an application.
No doubt we will all hear in due course via a Parliamentary Statement like the GAP announcement last week.
Tallsar is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 06:54
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,378
Received 696 Likes on 310 Posts
Any thoughts on who will be assessing the technical compliance of the bids this time?

Last time the SARF provided most of the SMEs and they spent a lot of time having to show that superficial claims of compliance and capability were exactly that.

Who will call the bidders' bluffs in the DfT?
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 07:46
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,472
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
Who will call the bidders' bluffs in the DfT?
MCA Aviation, Bristol?
jimf671 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 08:29
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,378
Received 696 Likes on 310 Posts
The reason the Mil were used last time is because the MCA had no expertise in aviation - has anything changed?
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 08:53
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Mil have no experience in commercial aviation - has anything changed?
Epiphany is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 09:04
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,378
Received 696 Likes on 310 Posts
No-one is going to defend the MoD's poor commercial nouse.

But, if you want to ensure that what a bidder claims as compliance with the contract specification is, in fact, compliance rather than smoke and mirrors or outright lies - then you need SMEs who know SAR operations and SAR aircraft capability inside out.

Sadly, caveat emptor was the watchword with the last SARH competition since believing everything the salesman said was a sure path to lack of operational capability.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 09:06
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
How do you know that? It never produced a service to be judged
Manchester is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 10:38
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Nowhere Special
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What do the RAF know about modern Search & Rescue technology or modern helicopters? Their own fleet is old and dated and their personnel have NO experience of what these aircraft and its equipment can do.

However, if you want a 40 year old aircraft with a single hoist and a radar that points backwards all at a HUGE cost then......

Why is it that certain people in the RAF think they know it all, are the elite of the profession and that its their god given right to judge everyone else????

Night Watchman is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 12:00
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Isle of Wight
Age: 69
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NM-That old back wards facing radar got me to several trawlers in thick fog nearer to the shetlands than Lossiemouth, because the all singing, modern tecnology S-92'S couldn't get to any of the boats due to fog!!!
britinusa is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 12:40
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,472
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
Aye. And it may be relevant to mention that the view from the damp peat and rocky outcrop, with your shoulder against a fuselage, up into the staring eyes of a pilot with one-wheel-on and limited points of reference, turns out not to be any different whether they are RAF, Bristow, CHC, male, female, or have a background in RN, Irish Air Corp, civilian contractors or USAF.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 12:42
  #271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No - stop. Don't, DON'T let's have to put up with yet another round of radar willy-waving. Please.

The ideal scenario would be to have a group of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) who have appropriate experience of 1) SAR ops, 2) civilian ops, 3) modern aircraft and 4) modern rescue equipment systems. In order to advise in an unbiased fashion they would also have to 5) be independent of any of the bidders in the commercial project that requires their services.

Unfortunately, the very great majority of SMEs who meet requirements 1) to 4) will probably be employed by one of the companies involved in bidding for the project, hence these SMEs would not meet requirement 5) and would therefore be unacceptable to the DfT.

Military SMEs acted as SAR-H advisors primarily because they were independent of any commercial company, and their lack of familiarity with some modern systems was the price that had to be paid for this independence - though this would not prevent a good brain from being able to analyse performance claims vs graphs, or SOPs. Unfortunately there aren't many people available in the UK who meet all the criteria 1) to 5)!

Louis
louisnewmark is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 13:04
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAF SARF

Last time the SARF provided most of the SMEs and they spent a lot of time having to show that superficial claims of compliance and capability were exactly that.

Who will call the bidders' bluffs in the DfT?
Anyone except the team that chose the last SARH aircraft. The AW139 can't take two stretchers, can't take MIRG, hasn't got the range required in the contract, at the time didn't have an autohover system...
SARowl is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 15:26
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Newcastle Uk
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote Britinusa "NM-That old back wards facing radar got me to several trawlers in thick fog nearer to the shetlands than Lossiemouth, because the all singing, modern tecnology S-92'S couldn't get to any of the boats due to fog!!!"

I'm sorry but that is a load of twaddle
Rescue1 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 15:50
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Up North
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote Britinusa "NM-That old back wards facing radar got me to several trawlers in thick fog nearer to the shetlands than Lossiemouth, because the all singing, modern tecnology S-92'S couldn't get to any of the boats due to fog!!!"

I'm sorry but that is a load of twaddle
And would one like to expand on that please

Wiretensioner
Wiretensioner is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 16:15
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WT, don't bite! There's already a SAR radar discussion thread from a few months ago that had a few useful comments in and among the sniping; please (I say again) PLEASE don't let this one degenerate into the same to-and-fro arguments.

Please?

Louis
louisnewmark is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 16:35
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West coast Australia :)
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think WT is referring to R1's refuting the MCA cab couldn't do the job, especially as WT has operated the SK with said radar and not the merits of it.

Si
bigglesbutler is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 18:11
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,378
Received 696 Likes on 310 Posts
The stuff the SARF SMEs had to trawl through had a little to do with the radar but plenty more to do with claimed performance of both the aircraft and equipment not meeting claimed specification by the bidders.

I had no intention of reopening the radar debate though some here seem very sensitive about it.

I am also very aware that the civsar capability as presently demonstrated by CHC up North is (apart from lack of NVG) very impressive and the layout of the back of the aircraft (and the cockpit I suppose) puts the Sea king to shame - as it should since our aircraft is 60 plus years old.

However it is not the RAF's fault that the AW139 is not fit for purpose as a SAR aircraft.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 19:18
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Isle of Wight
Age: 69
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
R1 &WT-The summer of 2008, there was a week of thick fog over the North sea in the Shetland area. Lossie and Shetland also had fog. Fisherman with heart attack, so a rush to hospital job, ARCC informed us the S 92 couldn't do the job due to thick fog. Which did surprise us. So we did the job, so it isn't twaddle!! There was a second job that week, which we were ask to do, for the same reason.
britinusa is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 21:11
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Britinusa
Not doubting your recollection of the circumstances but are you sure it was 2008? Assuming summer, or what passes for it up north, is around May to September, a quick trawl of my personal memory banks - increasingly suspect it has to be said with the passage of time - doesn’t come up with any matches. The name(s) of the vessel(s) or date(s) might spark a response and help inform the debate.
Bluenose 50 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2012, 21:16
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 42
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 3 Posts
britinusa to be fair the amount of times we (stornoway) have been told by other crews that we have turned down jobs with out even being asked could not be counted on all my fingers and toes.

Not happened recently but a few years ago calls to people on the unit from friends in the Mil happened ever few months to ask why we turned down a job we knew nothing about.

So the truth is not always what you are told mate.

Cheers

Lioncopter
Lioncopter is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.