The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H
everyone knows you can tell`em but you can`t tell`em much
I think quite a few night live lifts were completed by Wessex 2 and Whirlwind before that whilst we crabs were 'stumbling around' doing SAR.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Grief Jim..... not tales of warping rotor blades too!! JE - it was remiss of me not to mention the Germans too (Kriegsmarine not Luftwaffe?)...
Now...back to the future......and the past too!
Now...back to the future......and the past too!
Ah yes, welcome back Epiphany. Your last contribution on this thread was:
Funny how it all went quiet from you right after you made a prat of yourself last time...would it be worth learning from your past experience and appearing ignorant by remaining silent, rather than opening your mouth and removing all doubt (again!)...? Or are you still so bitter that the world of SAR has moved on since you left that you can't refrain from denigrating very capable and current operators like Crab?
Anyone who even considers flying in thick fog is an idiot.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remarkably TOD I still stand by my statement. Sorry you have missed me but I do not rush home everyday to breathlessly log onto the SAR thread to read yours and others words in awe and admiration.
Scrabble around in thick fog as much as you like to prove whatever you think you have to prove (the usual 'saving lives' BS no doubt). That is your choice. My choice is not to do that and my crew and family are very happy about that too. Perhaps I am alone in my opinion. So be it, I can live with that and your scorn.
In relation to Crab I am certainly not alone in my opinion. His condescending views on civil SAR and his blatant self-promotion will always be his downfall. I may be out of date with the latest SAR technology and techniques as my last SAR flight in an S61N (FLIR, autohover etc) was 8 years ago but I somehow survived 15 years SAR/EMS as PIC in various parts of the world so I am entitled to an opinion.
My self-preservation instincts apparently paid off as I now fly a nice modern helicopter in a very pleasant part of the world with no night-standby duties, earning an enormous tax-free salary. I knew a few collegues who did not share my views on flying in conditions well-below sensible limits who are no longer with us. One of them decided that he would push his luck one night and not only killed himself but also his crew and the young mother and child who was being 'saved' by our hero. He killed them all but the fog didn't help. After the fog cleared the next day I was one of the first on the scene. Not something I will forget in a hurry.
I may look back in here in a week or for my own amusement (but don't hold your breath) so feel free the pour on a few more buckloads of scorn. I wish you well in your own mission to save lives in those dark, satanic and frequently foggy hills.
Scrabble around in thick fog as much as you like to prove whatever you think you have to prove (the usual 'saving lives' BS no doubt). That is your choice. My choice is not to do that and my crew and family are very happy about that too. Perhaps I am alone in my opinion. So be it, I can live with that and your scorn.
In relation to Crab I am certainly not alone in my opinion. His condescending views on civil SAR and his blatant self-promotion will always be his downfall. I may be out of date with the latest SAR technology and techniques as my last SAR flight in an S61N (FLIR, autohover etc) was 8 years ago but I somehow survived 15 years SAR/EMS as PIC in various parts of the world so I am entitled to an opinion.
My self-preservation instincts apparently paid off as I now fly a nice modern helicopter in a very pleasant part of the world with no night-standby duties, earning an enormous tax-free salary. I knew a few collegues who did not share my views on flying in conditions well-below sensible limits who are no longer with us. One of them decided that he would push his luck one night and not only killed himself but also his crew and the young mother and child who was being 'saved' by our hero. He killed them all but the fog didn't help. After the fog cleared the next day I was one of the first on the scene. Not something I will forget in a hurry.
I may look back in here in a week or for my own amusement (but don't hold your breath) so feel free the pour on a few more buckloads of scorn. I wish you well in your own mission to save lives in those dark, satanic and frequently foggy hills.
Last edited by Epiphany; 3rd Apr 2012 at 12:31.
Fortunately Epiphany, many people's lives have been saved in appalling conditions by the sort of 'hero' you wish to denigrate in your rather smug and self-satisfied post.
I am not fan of the gung-ho approach to SAR but flying in shite conditions to save lives is often what is required and if it is done it should be a crew decision.
I must point out that this is neither blatant self- promotion nor civvy bashing, the fact is that a lot of SAR crews both mil and civ have put themselves at considerable personal risk to save the lives of others - that is the reality of SAR and probably why you didn't fit in well.
Enjoy your tax free salary.
I am not fan of the gung-ho approach to SAR but flying in shite conditions to save lives is often what is required and if it is done it should be a crew decision.
I must point out that this is neither blatant self- promotion nor civvy bashing, the fact is that a lot of SAR crews both mil and civ have put themselves at considerable personal risk to save the lives of others - that is the reality of SAR and probably why you didn't fit in well.
Enjoy your tax free salary.
For God's sake everyone - calm down. You're behaving like brats at a birthday party. If members of the public looked in, they wouldn't believe most of you were well educated extremely professional experts 
Let's keep the wise cracks to the gutter and concentrate on what's happening at Long SAR (which at the moment is precisely nowt!).
Tallsar - nice post and well controlled too
OK: so all the advisors were sacked 3 weeks ago. ALL of the PQQ participants have been given the ITT documents BUT only a hand full can go fwd on May 10th. Now why is DfT holding back with the decision to name those shortlisted???
And your comments on the new advisors would be gratefully received
Let's keep the wise cracks to the gutter and concentrate on what's happening at Long SAR (which at the moment is precisely nowt!).
Tallsar - nice post and well controlled too
OK: so all the advisors were sacked 3 weeks ago. ALL of the PQQ participants have been given the ITT documents BUT only a hand full can go fwd on May 10th. Now why is DfT holding back with the decision to name those shortlisted???
And your comments on the new advisors would be gratefully received
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: in a state of flux
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TC
Thank you, I feel suitably chastised and will retreat into my shell.
Or B.
You, and others, have completely failed to answer or refute the points I posed. Are you a labour politician, deny the truth and push your incorrect point no matter what?
Do you deny the RAF have saved countless lives?
Do you deny that 50 years of expertise can't be transferred without loss? If not, please let us know the secret - you'll make a mint.
Or, are you simply one of those who will benefit from the civilianisation and the truth is too uncomfortable? (Rhetorical - I know the answer).
When the civvies screw up, lose a casualty at night in the mountains due to lack of goggle expertise, I will be there to remind you. If it doesn't happen, then you are right and I am wrong. I am not wrong.
As for experience, I have 4800hrs Seaking SAR, 2700 Wessex SAR. 1476 casualties picked up (I logged every one), including 59 in one day.
PS. Epiphany - you are clearly an aviator with scant knowledge of SAR. Flying in fog is sometimes necessary to save lives, especially in Britain. If properly trained and equipped, it is safe, even relatively easy. Done it several times (always to save life) and always saved those lives. EVERY time. No losses, no accidents, and had a ball. Still, at least you know your limits. As Gordon gekko said, 'Stay out of the tall grass if you can't piss with the big dogs...'
Thank you, I feel suitably chastised and will retreat into my shell.
Or B.
You, and others, have completely failed to answer or refute the points I posed. Are you a labour politician, deny the truth and push your incorrect point no matter what?
Do you deny the RAF have saved countless lives?
Do you deny that 50 years of expertise can't be transferred without loss? If not, please let us know the secret - you'll make a mint.
Or, are you simply one of those who will benefit from the civilianisation and the truth is too uncomfortable? (Rhetorical - I know the answer).
When the civvies screw up, lose a casualty at night in the mountains due to lack of goggle expertise, I will be there to remind you. If it doesn't happen, then you are right and I am wrong. I am not wrong.
As for experience, I have 4800hrs Seaking SAR, 2700 Wessex SAR. 1476 casualties picked up (I logged every one), including 59 in one day.
PS. Epiphany - you are clearly an aviator with scant knowledge of SAR. Flying in fog is sometimes necessary to save lives, especially in Britain. If properly trained and equipped, it is safe, even relatively easy. Done it several times (always to save life) and always saved those lives. EVERY time. No losses, no accidents, and had a ball. Still, at least you know your limits. As Gordon gekko said, 'Stay out of the tall grass if you can't piss with the big dogs...'
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fog flying
To be fair to both sides of the camp the degree to which you have been exposed to fog-flying will colour your judgement. Remember the crabs were first exposed to Sea King Ops in an RN environment - an Anti Submarine environment. They no doubt learned to be confident in foggy days because we had come to terms with those conditions many years before.
When the fleet depends on you protecting them from submarine threats you need a real day-night all-weather capability. The Fleet AIr Arm developed that capability to the point that we had systems and trained pilots capable of flying the mission totally blind in fog at night from the moment you disappeared over the side of the ship into the inky gloom til the moment you returned and landed back on board. Gaining the confidence in the systems and the training is a very important step towards being able to add SAROPS to the list of capabilities. Remember for us SAR was a SECONDARY role that we were all trained for and all expected to do well at despite this not being our primary activity.
I am not surprised that SAROPS are conducted in fog and conducted safely and effectively, it is merely an extension of the skills the RAF were given in those early days of the 1970s by crews (RAF & RN) who had the skills and the confidence to take it on with all the benefits of a 'looker' on the radar (search radar not weather radar). Remember that RAF SAR is a PRIMARY role, that's all they do so they have the opportunity to polish the basic fog-flying skills and can do it well and do it safely.
Epiphany holds a view that I identify with whole-heartedly and I don't criticise him for holding it. We all need to know and understand our own limitations and because I believe Epiphany comes from a military rather than a naval background he would not have had the opportunity the allow fog-flying to become an every-day event. If you are not trained to work in fog then don't go there.
Now do as the headmaster says, stop this 'mine is bigger than yours' nonsense and lets return to a more interesting discussion.
G.
When the fleet depends on you protecting them from submarine threats you need a real day-night all-weather capability. The Fleet AIr Arm developed that capability to the point that we had systems and trained pilots capable of flying the mission totally blind in fog at night from the moment you disappeared over the side of the ship into the inky gloom til the moment you returned and landed back on board. Gaining the confidence in the systems and the training is a very important step towards being able to add SAROPS to the list of capabilities. Remember for us SAR was a SECONDARY role that we were all trained for and all expected to do well at despite this not being our primary activity.
I am not surprised that SAROPS are conducted in fog and conducted safely and effectively, it is merely an extension of the skills the RAF were given in those early days of the 1970s by crews (RAF & RN) who had the skills and the confidence to take it on with all the benefits of a 'looker' on the radar (search radar not weather radar). Remember that RAF SAR is a PRIMARY role, that's all they do so they have the opportunity to polish the basic fog-flying skills and can do it well and do it safely.
Epiphany holds a view that I identify with whole-heartedly and I don't criticise him for holding it. We all need to know and understand our own limitations and because I believe Epiphany comes from a military rather than a naval background he would not have had the opportunity the allow fog-flying to become an every-day event. If you are not trained to work in fog then don't go there.
Now do as the headmaster says, stop this 'mine is bigger than yours' nonsense and lets return to a more interesting discussion.
G.
Geoffers,
All valid points. Unfortunately for Epifanny, his statement was so sweeping and so damning - without any hint of understanding that other people might be able to achieve safely what he cannot do himself - that he managed to alienate pretty much everyone! Even Crab rarely pisses off that many people at once - and most of the time he's only doing it out of badness anyway...
All valid points. Unfortunately for Epifanny, his statement was so sweeping and so damning - without any hint of understanding that other people might be able to achieve safely what he cannot do himself - that he managed to alienate pretty much everyone! Even Crab rarely pisses off that many people at once - and most of the time he's only doing it out of badness anyway...
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LN450 - Autohover
fully automated auto hover - I seem to remember having that in my Sea King in 1970 and if you leave out the aux hover trim then my Wessex 3 had full-auto hover in 1969 and was around a while before that.
Serious question; was the Sea King/Wessex auto hover system fully duplex with RNAV route, MOT (mark on target), trans up, trans down, and AHT (Aircrew hover trim manoeuvre)?
SARowl the seaking is simplex , not duplex. There is no automatic back up auto pilot?? If HT or CYC fails, that's it, the channel remains inoperative.
I believe the AW139 is triplex.
I believe the AW139 is triplex.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAR Owl
The Sea King - from memory - has TD and TU with the MoT being an Observer function. He would drive you to a TD position having marked the on-top position on his plot or use a radar fix from the target.
In that respect the Wessex 3 was more advanced. The pilot's HSI incorporated a Nav Display that provided track and distance to a point where you trimmed the IAS hold from 90 its to 70 its then engaged 'Pilot Turn' to auto-turn into the wind (Hdg Bug). When the turn light went out you engaged TD. The definitive point used to set up the circuit pattern was set by the Observer based on either an on-top position or a radar target. The Wx 3 was duplex. The Sea King was simplex and not having done the Phase 5 course yet I can't tell you for sure what the AW139 system is but I will be surprised if it's triplex given that there are only two series actuators in PR & Y axis and a simplex collective actuator with duplicated inputs.
G.
In that respect the Wessex 3 was more advanced. The pilot's HSI incorporated a Nav Display that provided track and distance to a point where you trimmed the IAS hold from 90 its to 70 its then engaged 'Pilot Turn' to auto-turn into the wind (Hdg Bug). When the turn light went out you engaged TD. The definitive point used to set up the circuit pattern was set by the Observer based on either an on-top position or a radar target. The Wx 3 was duplex. The Sea King was simplex and not having done the Phase 5 course yet I can't tell you for sure what the AW139 system is but I will be surprised if it's triplex given that there are only two series actuators in PR & Y axis and a simplex collective actuator with duplicated inputs.
G.
Last edited by Geoffersincornwall; 4th Apr 2012 at 14:42. Reason: additional material
Since the salt encrusted IGV's were during Dave Mallock and Tony Baker's rescue in 1974 it is only fair to include the Luftwaffe, as it was one of their cabs that Dave was driving 
Apologies for the OT rambling......
Apologies for the OT rambling......
Dave Mallock was on a German Navy Seaking! The Luftwaffe never had such a nice helicopter.
skadi
Can somebody explain to me what difference it will make in the future to the poor sod in the water or lying in the snow what type of air speed hold the Wessex had?
No. On second thoughts, don't bother.
I think there might be other matters to which you guys could make a serious contribution. For instance, as mentioned in a recent RUSI report, where are all the helicopter pilots coming from in the future?
No. On second thoughts, don't bother.
I think there might be other matters to which you guys could make a serious contribution. For instance, as mentioned in a recent RUSI report, where are all the helicopter pilots coming from in the future?
SarOwl - the Sea King 3A has a duplex FCS since each VG feeds a lane in the ASE unlike the Mk3s and 5s and it has comparator circuits to monitor each lane. It has the SN500 FPC which should be familiar to S61 drivers as I believe they have the SN550 fitted for SAR work.
The 3A also benefits from the RNAV rather than the CDNU which brings better connectivity so it can drive the aircraft around search patterns and nav routes just like a real autopilot. Additionally the RadOp can send marked targets forward to the RNAV from the radar.
I think the 139 is just duplex but benefits from an inertial/GPS nav system that doesn't rely on doppler for the AHT functions. I didn't particularly like the TD on the 139 - it was quicker but steeper than a Sea King which felt uncomfortable in light winds at night. The Sea King profile with a gradual reduction in speed which reaches set height before zero groundspeed (or the 10 kt trickle in a 3A) is more comfortable in IMC.
The 3A also benefits from the RNAV rather than the CDNU which brings better connectivity so it can drive the aircraft around search patterns and nav routes just like a real autopilot. Additionally the RadOp can send marked targets forward to the RNAV from the radar.
I think the 139 is just duplex but benefits from an inertial/GPS nav system that doesn't rely on doppler for the AHT functions. I didn't particularly like the TD on the 139 - it was quicker but steeper than a Sea King which felt uncomfortable in light winds at night. The Sea King profile with a gradual reduction in speed which reaches set height before zero groundspeed (or the 10 kt trickle in a 3A) is more comfortable in IMC.
