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 19th Feb 2013, 12:18
  #1161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: EGPB/EGPD
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The current process for tasking MCA helo's, is the ARCC contact the MRCC responsible for the helo, and then the MRCC scramble that helo. The ARCC's role is to allocate the closet unit.

At the moment having no HF in the back of the CHC cabs, works just fine. There has never been a great need for it. Should the winchman require a link call with a doctor then this is possible through the use of the satphone.

In fact i think most current CHC sar flights would prefer not to speak to the ARCC direct.
shetlander is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 16:36
  #1162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
The current process for tasking MCA helo's, is the ARCC contact the MRCC responsible for the helo, and then the MRCC scramble that helo. The ARCC's role is to allocate the closet unit.
That is just the way the MCA like it and not the way the rest of the SAR assets in UK are tasked.

Again it makes airborne retasking more difficult especially if you are out of range of FM comms.

In fact i think most current CHC sar flights would prefer not to speak to the ARCC direct.
that is a very professional attitude

Airwave is actually the way forward and SARH flts will need to accept that technology because it is common to ALL the other emergency services and allows you to talk to the POLsA for a search or the paramedic on scene for actual medical updates on the casualty.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 17:45
  #1163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: EGPB/EGPD
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airwave is actually the way forward and SARH flts will need to accept that technology because it is common to ALL the other emergency services and allows you to talk to the POLsA for a search or the paramedic on scene for actual medical updates on the casualty.
Agree with you on that one. Airwave is defiantly the way forward and opens up a few possibilities for SAR.

Well having spoken to the ARCC, they themselves agree that HF is a "dying art". The coastguard no longer listen out on 2182 anymore.

As far as I am aware the only helos in the UK that receive tasking's over HF is the mil ones. Yes the Bond helos and foreign sar helos are equipped but they are not tasked over HF.

I have never know a problem tasking a MCA helo over vhf.
shetlander is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 18:13
  #1164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Coastguard chief 'gagged' over search and rescue privatisation | Politics | The Guardian

Blue on blue?
onesquaremetre is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 19:04
  #1165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Away with the Fairies
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Great piece by The Guardian - Not!

Surely the MP concerned doesn't seriously think that he can make any impact on a contract that's been ongoing for this amount time and with only a few weeks left until announcement and contract signature!
No Vote Joe is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 19:39
  #1166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
No Vote Joe - don't forget what happened to the last version of SARH which had already passed the preferred bidder stage and the East coast train line fiasco which was terminated AFTER contract award and signing.

Hadn't realised the MCA chief was ex-RN, rather explains his desire for world domination and removal of the RAF from SAR
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 19:52
  #1167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,470
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
I think it's useful that the Guardian is keeping these changes in the public eye. However, I think that they could do a much better job of it. Unfortunately, this subject has been out of the public eye throughout most of the process and the public have never been treated to a full and frank article on how this came about and what the standard of the service will be. After several recent poor articles on fringe issues, most of the reponse is screaming nutters who understand almost nothing about what is happening.
jimf671 is online now  
Old 19th Feb 2013, 22:16
  #1168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Screaming nutters?

As uninformed as the masses may be about the subtle detail of Search and Rescue, what they have plenty of experience of is seeing a previously nationalised service or industry falling into private hands and shortly thereafter, experiencing a notable shift in what is output and/or what they have to fork out for the service - think electricity, think gas. In some examples, previously nationalised services such as British Rail were hardly models of efficiency yet is the general public overwhelmingly satisfied with the profit-driven companies that have replaced BR? I think not.

Is it therefore any surprise that when the public is informed of the privatisation of services that are considered by many to be world-leading examples of the craft, they respond unfavourably?

Last edited by onesquaremetre; 19th Feb 2013 at 22:20.
onesquaremetre is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 05:39
  #1169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mil SAR -v- REDS

How does it feel to know that the military prefer the continued existence of the Red Arrows to that of MILSAR.

Puts all of our arguments in the shade when the perception in government is that Joe Public CARE about the REDS but care less about the end of MILSAR.

Perhaps we should stop dancing on the head of a pin and just get on with making the best of it?

G.
Geoffersincornwall is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 06:50
  #1170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
No Geoffers, I think those who KNOW the difference and the issues involved in privatisation should continue to voice their concerns,

Joe Public only knows what the media give them so it is important that the media continue to engage on it.

The politicians have foisted this situation on us and need to be held accountable for it - the cheaper is better dogma has been proven not to work in so many areas of public service.

Last edited by [email protected]; 20th Feb 2013 at 06:51.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 07:35
  #1171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crab

Why then did the Air Force choose the Red Arrows over the SAR fleet?

Didn't they realise that cost is factor these days? Of course they did but nonetheless a curious interpretation of military priorities.

Believe me if we have an inkling of what lay ahead then we are in for much tougher times and may come to thank our lucky stars that we got off so lightly.

Please feel free to continue the dance. The pin head is big enough for a few more.

G.
Geoffersincornwall is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 07:41
  #1172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,470
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
I think those who KNOW the difference and the issues involved in privatisation should continue to voice their concerns
Yes, but your MP can probably only hear those concerned about the issues that were already settled 10 or 15 years ago, or the death throws of the Portland half chopper. Getting issues that affect the value of the entire service heard over the background hiss and din can be a problem. And you thought HF was noisy!

TheyWorkForYou: Hansard and Official Reports for the UK Parliament, Scottish Parliament, and Northern Ireland Assembly - done right


... Joe Public CARE about the REDS but care less about the end of MILSAR.
And CSAR, post 2015. What will happen there? I can imagine that five years from now, if anything exists at all, it will be what some RM Capt and a RN Cdr have cobbled together on a carrier with no budget and no kit except what their lads have 'borrowed'. Same old.

Last edited by jimf671; 20th Feb 2013 at 08:09.
jimf671 is online now  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 09:15
  #1173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Away with the Fairies
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Why then did the Air Force choose the Red Arrows over the SAR fleet?"

Even if the new CAS is a helicopter mate (but a dedicated SAR basher!"), the RAF is still run for fast and pointy things!
No Vote Joe is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 21:53
  #1174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
Not only that but the Reds are still seen as a valuable recruiting and overseas defence sales tool whilst SAR is non-core (ie not warfighting in Afghanistan) business.

Poor choices by MoD but they spend so much time in-fighting anyway it's not that surprising.

Last edited by [email protected]; 20th Feb 2013 at 21:54.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2013, 22:47
  #1175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

Think the comment regarding not wanting to talk to ARCC was tongue in cheek. Reality seems to be the other way round, RAF assets self tasking to within 50NM of CivSAR bases and not even informing the flight or the nearby MRCC of their presence for 2 days was just one recent instance.

Tasking out of range of FM comms isn't difficult, just pick up the phone....

Last edited by Hedski; 20th Feb 2013 at 22:49.
Hedski is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 06:05
  #1176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
RAF assets self tasking to within 50NM of CivSAR bases and not even informing the flight or the nearby MRCC of their presence for 2 days was just one recent instance
Any specifics there Hedski?

All SAR Captains can self-task and , if they are already airborne and closer to the job than another SAR flight - they will clear it with the ARCCK - it is more likely that the ARCCK tasked them directly and just didn't inform civsar or MRCC; that is perhaps poor etiquette and out of character but nothing more.

And, straight from the AIP:
1 Responsible Services
1.1 Responsibility for Search and Rescue (SAR) for civil aircraft within the UK Search and Rescue Region (SRR) rests jointly with the
Department for Transport (DfT) and the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
1.1.1 The DfT is responsible for SAR policy for civil aviation.
Post: Department for Transport, Airports Policy Division, Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DR
Phone: 020-7944 4393
Fax: 020-7944 2192
1.1.2 The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) acts as adviser on SAR to the DfT. Queries on SAR for civil aviation, including matters arising
from this section of the AIP, should be addressed in the first instance to the following:
Post: Civil Aviation Authority, Directorate of Airspace Policy, ORA, K6, CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6TE
Phone: 020-7453 6543
Fax: 020-7453 6565
Telex: 883092 - EGGA
AFS: EGGAYFYG
1.1.3 The MoD is responsible for the implementation of SAR services for civil aviation throughout the UK SRR. This responsibility is
discharged through a single Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre (ARCC) at Kinloss.
Post: ARCC Kinloss, RAF Kinloss, Forres, Moray, IV36 0UH, Scotland
Phone: 01343-836001
Phone: 01309-672161 Ext 6202
Fax: 01309-678308/9
Telex: 75193
AFS: EGQKYCYX
Don't see the MCA or MRCCs mentioned there at all

I think the Aeronautical vs the Maritime parts of the train set are what the MCA has aspired to control for many years.

Last edited by [email protected]; 21st Feb 2013 at 09:53.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 10:29
  #1177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,470
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
I think Crab is getting to the crux issue that can destory the effectiveness of a potential world class service that is the UK's first planned SAR helicopter service.

The MCA and its MRCCs are not part of the picture in the AIP. The Coastguard is there to provide a UK Govt civilian SAR branding and a management structure for day-to-day contractor relations.

In CAP 999, the responsibilities are those of the air operator and the CAA. The customer doesn't get a say. Either the air operator meets the standard or there is no AOC and no service. So why does the MCA try to get in amongst the training tasks beyond making sure their own people have appropriate training?
jimf671 is online now  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 11:36
  #1178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

In the instance referred to the asset got airborne 2 days running a much greater distance from the incident than the SAR base that was far closer. When questioned ARCCK first indicated they were training, then the story changed to a tasking. Then the story changed again to a request from the crew to be tasked to the specific incident rather than any closer unit. That was the answer from ARCCK......
Hedski is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 11:58
  #1179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,367
Received 652 Likes on 287 Posts
Presumably Lossie - I suspect there must be something that the ARCCK aren't saying but it all seems rather unusual. There are some good operators in the ARCCK but there are also some under training and with little experience of UK helicopter SAROps.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 11:59
  #1180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,470
Received 29 Likes on 21 Posts
Were any other MoD aeronautical resources deployed to this incident, perhaps by helicopter?
jimf671 is online now  

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.